1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DUDLEY W. JACKLINE, No. 2:19-cv-1046 KJN P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION

14 SACRAMENTO COUNTY MAIN JAIL, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner is proceeding without counsel with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant 18 to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On July 19, 2019, the undersigned dismissed the petition with thirty days to 19 file an amended petition. (ECF No. 8.) Thirty days passed, and petitioner did not file an 20 amended petition. Accordingly, this action should be dismissed. 21 On July 22, 2019, petitioner filed a motion for appointment of counsel. There currently 22 exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 23 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of 24 counsel at any stage of the case “if the interests of justice so require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. 25 Governing § 2254 Cases. In the present case, the court does not find that the interests of justice 26 would be served by the appointment of counsel. 27 //// 28 //// 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. Petitioner’s request for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 9) is denied; 3 2. The Clerk of the Court shall appoint a district judge to this action; and 4 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed. 5 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 6 | assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within fourteen days 7 | after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written 8 | objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 9 | “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” If petitioner files objections, 10 | he shall also address whether a certificate of appealability should issue and, if so, why and as to 11 || which issues. A certificate of appealability may issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 “only if the 12 | applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 13 | 2253(c)(3). Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may 14 | waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Y1st, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 15 1991). 16 | Dated: August 30, 2019 " Aectl Aharon 18 KENDALL J. NE

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19 |] jack1046.110 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28