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.

Kelsaw v. Horel

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


November 18, 2010

RUFUS HARTY KELSAW, IV, PETITIONER,
v.
BOB HOREL, RESPONDENT.

ORDER

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus. By motion filed on November 1, 2010, petitioner again requests the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas corpus proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). Rather, the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case is warranted "if the interests of justice so require." 18 U.S.C. §3006A(a)(2)(b); see also Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing §2254 Cases. In this case, findings and recommendations have been entered which are awaiting review by the District Judge. It does not appear that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel at this time. Petitioner's November 1, 2010 motion for appointment of counsel is hereby DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20101118

© 1992-2010 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.