Fisher
(HC) Lopez v. Fisher
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DANIEL LOPEZ, Case No. 1:19-cv-01486-NONE-HBK Petitioner, ORDER DENYING APPOINTMENT OF
COUNSEL
v. (Doc. No. 23) RAYTHEL FISHER, JR.,
Respondent. 16 Before the Court is Petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel. (Doc. No. 23). Petitioner filed a pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus seeking relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. No. 1). Petitioner now requests that the Court appoint counsel to represent him in this case, stating that he has limited access to the law library and that he suffers from mental and cognitive impairments. There is no automatic, constitutional right to counsel in federal habeas proceedings. See Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 752 (1991); Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 479, 481 (9th Cir. 1958). The Criminal Justice Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A, however, authorizes this Court to appoint counsel for a financially eligible person who seeks relief under § 2254 when the “court determines 26 …