Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Williams v. Ryan

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


September 8, 2008

DANNY T. WILLIAMS, JR., PETITIONER,
v.
STUART J. RYAN, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

ORDER

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On June 12, 2008, petitioner filed a document styled, "Amended Complaint" in which he requests the appointment of counsel. 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 this time. The court will grant petitioner an extension of time to file his traverse to respondents' answer which was filed on May 30, 2008.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner's June 12, 2008 request for appointment of counsel (Doc. No. 39) is denied; and

2. Within thirty days from the service of this order, petitioner shall file his traverse, if any, to respondents' answer.

20080908

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.