Holbrook
(HC) Chavarin v. Holbrook
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
wOAOe 2 LOU EINUING Gor POC Ve Yh Vt 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ARNULFO CHAVARIN, No. 2:19-cv-1521 TLN KJN P Petitioner, Vv. ORDER DAVID HOLBROOK, Respondent. 16 Petitioner requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right 18 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 20 || the case “if the interests of justice so require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. Inthe 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 motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 23) is denied without prejudice. Dated: May 5, 2020 % …