(HC) Odom v. De La Cruz

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 RYAN BIGOSKI ODOM, No. 2:17-cv-0233 TLN AC P Petitioner, v. ORDER D.G. ADAMS, Respondent. 15 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Currently before the court are petitioner’s motions for counsel, to substitute respondent, and for clarification. ECF Nos. 56, 57, 60. I. Motion for Appointment of Counsel Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. ECF No. 56. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2) authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case if “the interests of justice so require.” Because the petition is fully briefed and submitted for decision, see ECF No. 45, there is no action for counsel to take t this time. The court therefore does…