(HC)Singh
Gurpartap Singh v. Warden of the Golden State Annex, et al.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1
2 3 4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 GURPARTAP SINGH, Case No. 1:25-cv-01689-KES-EPG-HC
12 Petitioner, ORDER REGARDING APPOINTMENT OF
COUNSEL
13 v.
14 WARDEN OF THE GOLDEN STATE ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT ANNEX, et al., TO SERVE DOCUMENTS 15 Respondents. 16 17 Petitioner, an immigration detainee who is representing himself, filed a petition for a writ 18 of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 19 There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. 20 See, e.g., Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986); Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 21 479, 481 (9th Cir. 1958). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) authorizes the appointment of 22 counsel at any stage of the proceeding for financially eligible persons if “the interests of justice 23 so require.” To determine whether to appoint counsel, the “court must evaluate the likelihood of 24 success on the merits as well as the ability of the petitioner to articulate his claims pro se in light 25 of the complexity of the legal issues involved.”…