Inderjeet Singh v. Warden of the Golden State Annex Detention Facility, et al.

1

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

11 INDERJEET SINGH, Case No. 1:25-cv-01632-JLT-SKO (HC)

12 Petitioner, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

13 v. [Doc. 3] 14 WARDEN OF THE GOLDEN STATE ANNEX DETENTION FACILITY, et al., 15 Respondents. 16

17 18 Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute 19 right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See, e.g., Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 20 479, 481 (9th Cir. 1958); Mitchell v. Wyrick, 727 F.2d 773, 774 (8th Cir. 1984). However, Title 21 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case if "the 22 interests of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. In the present 23 case, the Court does not find that the interests of justice require the appointment of counsel at the 24 present time. 25 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's request for appointment of 26 counsel is DENIED. 27

IT IS SO ORDERED.

1 Dated: December 1, 2025 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .…