(PC) Brooks v. Covello

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: September 10, 2020
• Docket: 2:20-cv-01573
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WILLIE L BROOKS, II, No. 2:20-CV-1573-DMC-P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 PATRICK COVELLO, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of 18 habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pending before the Court are petitioner’s motions for 19 appointed counsel (ECF No. 6 and 14). There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of 20 counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). 21 However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case “if 22 the interests of justice so require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. In the 23 present case, the Court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the 24 appointment of counsel at the present time. 25 / / / 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 / / / wOASe 2 EUV VEY EOIN OUT IR ey OO

1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s motions for 2 || appointment of counsel (ECF No. 6 and 14) are denied without prejudice to renewal, at the 3 | earliest, after a response to the petition has been filed. 4 5 6 || Dated: September 10, 2020 Ssvcqo_ 7 DENNIS M. COTA 8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28