From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Oliver v. Ayers

United States District Court, N.D. California
Oct 22, 2007
No. C 07-2233 MHP (pr) (N.D. Cal. Oct. 22, 2007)

Opinion

No. C 07-2233 MHP (pr).

October 22, 2007


ORDER


Petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel to represent him in this action is DENIED. (Docket # 6.) A district court may appoint counsel to represent a habeas petitioner whenever "the court determines that the interests of justice so require and such person is financially unable to obtain representation." 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). The decision to appoint counsel is within the discretion of the district court. See Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986). Appointment is mandatory only when the circumstances of a particular case indicate that appointed counsel is necessary to prevent due process violations.See id. The interests of justice do not require appointment of counsel in this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Oliver v. Ayers

United States District Court, N.D. California
Oct 22, 2007
No. C 07-2233 MHP (pr) (N.D. Cal. Oct. 22, 2007)
Case details for

Oliver v. Ayers

Case Details

Full title:LUKE E. OLIVER, Petitioner, v. ROBERT AYERS, warden, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, N.D. California

Date published: Oct 22, 2007

Citations

No. C 07-2233 MHP (pr) (N.D. Cal. Oct. 22, 2007)

Citing Cases

Vires v. Riley

The general rule is that inadequacy of consideration alone is not sufficient to justify cancellation of a…

Newman v. Winter

This court has stated that inadequacy of consideration is not sufficient to warrant the setting aside of a…