(HC) Harrison v. Brewer ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 1] MICHAEL DAVID HARRISON, No. 2:22-cv-1020 CKD P 12 Petitioner, 13 Vv. ORDER 14 D. BEWER, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute 18 || right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 19 | (9th Cir. 1996). 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the 20 || case “if the interests of Justice so require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. In 21 | the present case, the court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the 22 || appointment of counsel at the present time. 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for appointment of 24 || counsel (ECF No. 6) is denied. 25 | Dated: August 8, 2022 □□ / del a 26 CAROLYN K DELANEY 27 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 28 1/mp; harr1020.110