(HC) Ye v. Director of Corrections and Rehabilitation, No. 2:2013cv00972 - Document 22 (E.D. Cal. 2015)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 07/02/15 granting 20 Motion for Extension of time. Petitioner is granted 60 days from the date of this order in which to file objections to the 6/11/15 findings and recommendations. Petitioner's motion to appoint counsel 21 is denied. (Plummer, M)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LINNA YE, 12 Petitioner, 13 14 15 v. ORDER DIRECTOR OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, Respondent. 16 Petitioner has requested a sixty-day extension of time to file objections to the June 11, 17 18 No. 2:13-cv-0972 MCE CKD P 2015 findings and recommendations. Good cause appearing, this request will be granted. Petitioner also renews her request for appointment of counsel. (See ECF No. 5.) There 19 20 currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. 21 Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the 22 appointment of counsel at any stage of the case “if the interests of justice so require.” See Rule 23 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. In the present case, the court does not find that the 24 interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel. 25 //// 26 //// 27 //// 28 //// 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. Petitioner’s request for an extension of time (ECF No. 20) is granted; 3 2. Petitioner is granted sixty days from the date of this order in which to file objections to 4 5 6 the June 11, 2015 findings and recommendations; and 3. Petitioner’s motion to appoint counsel (ECF No. 21) is denied. Dated: July 2, 2015 _____________________________________ CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 2 / ye0972.111 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
