(HC) Sloan v. Sherman ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WARREN HERMAN SLOAN, No. 2:19-CV-2508-DMC-P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of 18 habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pending before the court is petitioner’s motion for 19 the appointment of counsel (ECF No. 3). 20 There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas 21 proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. 22 § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case “if the interests of 23 justice so require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. In the present case, the 24 court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel at 25 the present time. 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 / / / 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for 2 || appointment of counsel (ECF No. 3) is denied without prejudice to renewal, at the earliest, after 3 || aresponse to the petition has been filed. 4 5 | Dated: January 2, 2020 Ssvcqo_ 6 DENNIS M. COTA 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28