Krueger

Krueger v. Pallares

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 7, 20224:21-cv-06145California446 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SARA L KRUEGER, Case No. 21-cv-06145-HSG

Petitioner, ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

v. Re: Dkt. No. 6 MIKE PALLARES, Respondent.

12 Petitioner has requested appointment of counsel, stating that an attorney is needed because she is indigent; she was represented by appointed counsel in state courts; she has been granted in forma pauperis status; the issues are complex including both procedural and substantive law’ the case is serious; she does not understand the legal issues, she cannot undertake additional investigation for the jury selection claim if that becomes necessary; and she is unable to respond to a motion or answer filed by Respondent’s counsel. Dkt. No. 6. Petitioner’s request is DENIED for the following reasons. The Sixth Amendment right to counsel does not apply in habeas corpus actions. Knaubert v. Goldsmith, 791 F.2d 722, 728 (9th Cir. 1986). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) authorizes a…

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.