(HC) Eberly v. Neuschmid

8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA GARY ALAN EBERLY, No. 2:19-CV-1631-MCE-DMC-P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER ROBERT NEUSCHMID, 15 Respondent.

17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pending before the court is petitioner’s motion for the appointment of counsel (ECF No. 24).

20 There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case “if the interests of justice so require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. In the present case, the Court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel.

25 /// /// /// /// LUV VEY ENS IVINS OUI OI ee OY ov 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for appointment | of counsel (ECF No. 24) is denied.

4 | Dated: August 19, 2020 Ssvcqo_ 5 DENNIS M. COTA 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE