(HC) Garrett v. Moore ( 2022 )

2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 CHARLES DEVON GARRETT, 1:22-cv-00899-JLT-HBK (HC) 11 Petitioner, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 12 v. APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 13 SHAWN MOORE, (Doc. No. 19) 14 Respondent. 15 16 17 18 Before the court is Petitioner’s motion to appoint counsel. (Doc. No. 19). Petitioner, a 19 state prisoner, has pending a pro se amended petition for writ of habeas corpus filed under 28 20 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. No. 3). Petitioner requests the court to appoint counsel to represent him 21 because he does not have frequent access to the law library, which “is hindering him from 22 effectively litigating his case.” (Doc. No. 19). 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 7 petition without the aid of counsel. Further, the Court finds the circumstances of this case at this 8 time do not 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. 19) is denied without prejudice. 12 13 Dated: _ October 18, 2022 oe Uh. Sareh 5 14 HELENA M. SARCHLRUCHTA 15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28