IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
December 8, 2009
TIMOTHY ELLIS ROSS, PETITIONER,
D.K. SISTO, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
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 require appointment of counsel at the present time.
Also, petitioner has filed a request for an extension of time to file a response to respondent's November 13, 2009 motion to dismiss. Good cause appearing, the request will be granted.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner's November 30, 2009, request for appointment of counsel (Docket No. 13) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the proceedings;
2. Petitioner's November 30, 2009 request for an extension of time (Docket No. 13) is granted; and
3. Petitioner is granted thirty days from the date of this order in which to file a response to respondent's November 13, 2009 motion to dismiss.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.