(HC) Gazaway v. State of CA

District Court, E.D. California·Decided July 20, 2023·No. 2:23-cv-00699·Unknown

Opinion

JERRALD D. GAZAWAY, No. 2:23-CV-0699-DMC-P Petitioner, v. ORDER Respondent. Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pending before the Court are Petitioner’s motions for the appointment of counsel, ECF Nod. 4 and 5. 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 at the present time. / / / / / / / / / ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s motions for appointment of counsel, ECF Nos. 4 and 5, are denied without prejudice to renewal, at the earliest, after a response to the petition has been filed. Dated: July 19, 2023 Svc UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1]

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(HC) Gazaway v. State of CA, (E.D. Cal. 2023).

(HC) Gazaway v. State of CA ((HC) Gazaway v. State of CA) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nevius v. Sumner
105 F.3d 453 (Ninth Circuit, 1996)