IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 31, 2012
DONELL DAVIS, PETITIONER,
G.D. LEWIS, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Timothy J Bommer United States Magistrate Judge
Petitioner, for the third time, has requested a sixty day extension of time to file a traverse. He has also requested the court to assign him counsel in this matter. Based upon the representations made and only for this request, it is determined that good cause has been shown, and the request for extension of time is granted. Petitioner is advised that no further extensions of time will be granted, except for verified and extraordinary good cause shown.
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. As such, his request will be denied.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner's request filed for an extension of time is GRANTED;
2. Petitioner shall file his Traverse on or before March 31, 2012; and
3. Petitioner's request for appointment of counsel is DENIED without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the proceedings.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.