United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2020

(PC)Wells v. Newsom

(PC)Wells v. Newsom
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided August 13, 2020
(PC)Wells v. Newsom

Trial Court Opinion

WADE 2 □□ VEY EONS bo PNR ewey FP Oye At Vt 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA | ANDRE WELLS, No. 2:20-cv-1557 AC P 12 Petitioner, 13 V. ORDER | GAVIN NEWSOME, 15 Respondent.

17 Petitioner requests the appointment of counsel on the ground he is disabled. Petitioner’s || request is premature because he has not yet filed a valid pleading in this case. See ECF No. 3.

19 | Moreover, this is no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas (or putative habeas) || proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). The interests of justice | do not require appointment of counsel at the present time. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A; Rule 8(c), || Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases.

23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s request for appointment of || counsel, ECF No. 6, is DENIED without prejudice.

25 | DATED: August 12, 2020 .

26 Attten— Lhar—e_ ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.