Tutton v. Swarthout
Filing
14
ORDER DENYING Motion for Appointment of Counsel 13 , signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 6/21/11. (Hellings, J)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
GORDON DOUGLAS TUTTON,
12
13
14
1:11-cv-00863 AWI SKO (HC)
Petitioner,
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
vs.
GARY SWARTHOUT, Warden,
(DOCUMENT #13)
15
16
Respondent.
____________________________________/
17
Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no
18
absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See, e.g., Anderson v. Heinze,
19
258 F.2d 479, 481 (9th Cir. 1958); Mitchell v. Wyrick, 727 F.2d 773, 774 (8th Cir. 1984).
20
However, Title 18 U.S.C. ยง 3006A(a)(2)(B) authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage
21
of the case if "the interests of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Rules Governing Section 2254
22
Cases. In the present case, the Court does not find that the interests of justice require the
23
appointment of counsel at the present time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that
24
Petitioner's request for appointment of counsel is denied.
25
IT IS SO ORDERED.
26
Dated:
3em3ec
27
28
June 21, 2011
/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
