IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 13, 2012
CHOKCHAI KRONGKEIT, PETITIONER,
MATTHEW CATE, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Carolyn K. Delaney United States Magistrate Judge
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.