(HC) McGee v. Salinas Valley State Prison

District Court, E.D. California·Decided August 29, 2025·No. 2:24-cv-01955·Unknown

Opinion

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA HAWTHORNE MCGEE, No. 2:24-cv-1955 DAD CSK P 1] Petitioner, Vv. ORDER SALINAS VALLEY STATE PRISON, Respondent. Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. 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 request for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 36) is denied without prejudice. Dated: August 29, 2025 A aA Aan Spe | CHI SOO KIM UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE mege1955.110/2

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

(HC) McGee v. Salinas Valley State Prison, (E.D. Cal. 2025).

(HC) McGee v. Salinas Valley State Prison ((HC) McGee v. Salinas Valley State Prison) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related