(HC)Caridad

(HC)Caridad v. Black

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 26, 20212:21-cv-00704California372 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 BENJAMIN TABAYOYONG CARIDAD, Case No. 2:21-cv-00704-JDP (HC) Petitioner, ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION

FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AND

v. GRANTING RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR

AN EXTENSION OF TIME

CINDY BLACK, ECF Nos. 13, 15 Respondent. 16 Petitioner has filed a motion for appointment of counsel. ECF No. 13. A petitioner in a habeas proceeding generally does not have a right to appointment of counsel. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, the court is authorized to appoint counsel at any stage of the case “if the interests of justice so require.” See Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986); 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). In assessing whether to appoint counsel, the court evaluates the petitioner’s likelihood of success on the merits and his ability to articulate his claims, considering the complexity of the legal issues involved. See Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir.…

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.