Chestang v. Swarthout

Full title: EDDIE LEE CHESTANG, Petitioner, v. SWARTHOUT, Respondent.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Sep 17, 2015

2:14-CV-2139-MCE-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 17, 2015)

Opinion

EDDIE LEE CHESTANG, Petitioner, v. SWARTHOUT, Respondent. No. 2:14-CV-2139-MCE-CMK-P United States District Court, E.D. California. September 17, 2015

          ORDER

          CRAIG M. KELLISON, Magistrate Judge.

         Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

         Petitioner seeks the appointment of counsel (Doc. 21). There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case "if the interests of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. In the present case, the court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel. Further requests for the appointment of counsel will not be considered.

         Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. 21) is denied.