(HC) Bagley v. Ndoh ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES RAY BAGLEY, JR., No. 2:17-cv-2213 MCE DB P 12 Petitioner, 13 V. ORDER 14 ROSEMARY NDOH, Warden, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel because he is indigent. There 18 | currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. 19 | Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the 20 || appointment of counsel at any stage of the case “if the interests of justice so require.” See Rule 21 | 8&(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. In the present case, the court does not find that the 22 | interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel at the present time. 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for appointment of 24 | counsel (ECF No. 18) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the 25 | proceedings. 26 | Dated: January 27, 2020 DB/Inbox/Routine/bagl2213.110 28 BORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE