(HC) Collins v. Trate ( 2022 )

2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 JASON C. COLLINS, 1:22 -cv-01114-HBK (HC) 11 Petitioner, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 12 v. APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 13 TRATE, Warden, (Doc. No. 3) 14 Respondent. 15 16 17 Before the court is Petitioner’s motion to appoint counsel. (Doc. No. 3). Petitioner, a 18 federal prisoner, has pending a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus filed under 28 U.S.C. § 19 2241. (Doc. No. 1). Petitioner requests the court to appoint counsel to represent him because he 20 is unskilled, the issues in the case are complex, he does not have “access to the materials needed 21 to argue these claims correctly” and he does not have access to “state law terminology and 22 definitions” in federal prison, (Doc. No. 3). 23 There is no automatic, constitutional right to counsel in federal habeas proceedings. See 24 Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 752 (1991); Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 479, 481 (9th 25 Cir. 1958). The Criminal Justice Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A, however, authorizes this court to 26 appoint counsel for a financially eligible person who seeks relief under § 2241 when the “court 27 determines that the interests of justice so require.” Id. at § 3006A(a)(2)(B); see also Chaney v. 28 Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986). Moreover, the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts require the court to appoint counsel: (1) when the court has authorized discovery upon a showing of good cause and appointment of counsel is necessary for 5 effective discovery; or (2) when the court has determined that an evidentiary hearing is warranted. 4 Id. at Rs. 6(a) and 8&(c). Based upon the record, the Court finds Petitioner has not demonstrated that appointment 6 of counsel is necessary at this stage of the proceedings. Petitioner was able to file his habeas petition without the aid of counsel. Further, the Court does not find the circumstances of this case 8 indicate that appointed counsel is necessary to prevent due process violations. ? Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 10 Petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. No. 3) is denied without prejudice. 12 13 Dated: _ September 6, 2022 oe Uh. Sareh 5 14 HELENA M. SARCH ROCHA 15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28