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.

Camacho v. McDonald

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


July 20, 2009

JOSE GUADALUPE CAMACHO, PETITIONER,
v.
M. MCDONALD, WARDEN, RESPONDENT.

ORDER

Petitioner has requested 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 the present time.

Petitioner has also requested an extension of time to file a traverse in this matter. Good cause appearing, the court will grant petitioner's request.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner's July 13, 2009 motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. No. 14) is denied;

2. Petitioner's July 13, 2009 motion for an extension of time (Doc. No. 15) is granted; and

3. Petitioner shall file and serve his traverse on or before August 17, 2009.

20090720

© 1992-2009 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.