(HC)Garza

(HC)Garza v. Phillips

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 23, 20241:23-cv-01723California211 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANGEL M. GARZA, Case No. 1:23-cv-01723-JLT-SKO (HC)

Petitioner, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

v. [Doc. 16] BRYAN PHILLIPS, Warden, Respondent.

16 Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See, e.g., Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 479, 481 (9th Cir. 1958); Mitchell v. Wyrick, 727 F.2d 773, 774 (8th Cir. 1984). However, Title 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case if "the interests of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. In this case, the Court does not find that the interests of justice require the appointment of counsel at the present time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's request for appointment of counsel is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 22, 2024 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . …

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.