Attchley

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LONNIE LEE POSLOF, JR., Case No. 1:21-cv-00339-JLT-HBK Petitioner, ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION

FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

v. (Doc. No. 26) M. ATTCHLEY, Respondent. 16 Before the Court is Petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel. (Doc. No. 26). Petitioner filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. No. 1). Respondent filed an answer to the petition on June 8, 2021, and Petitioner filed a traverse on July 2, 2021. (Doc. Nos. 20, 23). Petitioner argues that appointment of counsel is appropriate because he cannot afford a lawyer, the issues in the case are complex, his “imprisonment will greatly limit his ability to litigate this case,” and he needs assistance of counsel to amend his petition. (Doc. No. 26). 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…