(HC) Madero v. The People
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 ERIC CRUZ MADERO, Case No. 1:24-cv-00445-SAB-HC
12 Petitioner, ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S
MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL
13 v. (ECF No. 5) 14 THE PEOPLE,
15 Respondent.
16 17 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus 18 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 19 Petitioner has moved for appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 5.) There currently exists no 20 absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See, e.g., Chaney v. Lewis, 801 21 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986); Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 479, 481 (9th Cir. 1958). 22 However, the Criminal Justice Act authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the 23 proceeding for financially eligible persons if “the interests of justice so require.” 18 U.S.C. § 24 3006A(a)(2)(B). To determine whether to appoint counsel, the “court must evaluate the 25 likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the petitioner to articulate his claims 26 pro se in light of the complexity of the legal…