(HC) Khademi v. Santoro

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 1] DAVOOD KHADEMI, No. 2:21-cv-0902 KJN P 12 Petitioner, 13 Vv. ORDER 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right 18 to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th 19 Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of 20 the case “if the interests of justice so require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. 21 In the present case, the court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the 22 appointment of counsel at the present time. 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for appointment of 24 counsel (ECF N. 11) is denied without prejudice. 25 Dated: June 29, 2021 26 Aectl Aharon a7 KENDALL J.NE /ehad0902.110 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 28