Spearman

(HC) Thompson v. Spearman

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 26, 20212:19-cv-02328California415 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KANE MICHAEL THOMPSON, No. 2:19-cv-2328 KJM DB P Petitioner, v. ORDER M.E. SPEARMAN, Respondent. 16 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner challenges his 2017 conviction in Sacramento County Superior Court. Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 25.) Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 29.) There currently exists no absolute right 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 the case “if the interests of justice so require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. In the present case, petitioner has filed motions and responded to court orders. (See, e.g. ECF Nos. 2, 13, 14, 18.) Additionally, petitioner has properly filed…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.