Phillips

(HC) Welton v. Phillips

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 19, 20242:23-cv-01325California318 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROBERT WELTON, No. 2:23-cv-01325 DB P Petitioner, v. ORDER BRYAN D. PHILLIPS, Respondents. 16 Respondent has requested an extension of time to file the answer to petitioner’s application for writ of habeas corpus. (ECF No. 17.) Good cause appearing, the request is granted. In addition, petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 16.) 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, the court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel at the present time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 1. Respondent’s request for extension of…

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.