(HC) Ramirez v. Aguilar ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NARCISO RAMIREZ, Case No. 1:23-cv-01538-ADA-SKO (HC) 12 Petitioner, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 13 v. [Doc. 7] 14 MARK S. AGUILAR, et al., 15 Respondents. 16 17 Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute 18 right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See, e.g., Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 19 479, 481 (9th Cir. 1958); Mitchell v. Wyrick, 727 F.2d 773, 774 (8th Cir. 1984). However, Title 20 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case if "the 21 interests of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. In the 22 present case, given the premature nature of the petition, the Court does not find that the interests 23 of justice require the appointment of counsel at the present time. 24 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's request for appointment of 25 counsel is DENIED. 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. 27 Dated: November 21, 2023 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . 1 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27