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.

Chokchai Krongkeit v. Matthew Cate

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


November 13, 2012

CHOKCHAI KRONGKEIT, PETITIONER,
v.
MATTHEW CATE, RESPONDENT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Carolyn K. Delaney United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Petitioner has requested an extension of time to file objections to the court's July 31, 2012 findings and recommendations. Good cause appearing, that request will be granted.

Petitioner has also 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.*fn1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner's request for an extension of time (Dkt. No. 30) is granted;

2. Petitioner is granted thirty days from the date of this order to file objections to the court's July 31, 2012 findings and recommendations; and

3. Petitioner's request for the appointment of counsel (Dkt. No. 29) is denied.


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.