Free Order on Motion to Appoint Counsel - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA William Floyd Smith, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) ) ) ) ) Respondents. ) ) CV 04-573-PHX-FJM (MS)

10 11

vs.
12

ORDER

Dora Schriro, et al.,
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Before the Court is Petitioner's "Motion for Appointment of Counsel" filed August 18, 2005. In his motion, Petitioner states that he has no access to a law library, that the issues in his case are complicated, and that the claims are meritorious. "There is no constitutional right to counsel on habeas." Bonin v. Vasquez, 999 F.2d 425 (9th Cir. 1993). Indigent state prisoners applying for habeas corpus relief are not entitled to appointed counsel unless the circumstances indicate that appointed counsel is necessary to prevent due process violations. Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1023 (1987); Kreiling v. Field, 431 F.2d 638, 640 (9th Cir. 1970); Eskridge v. Rhay, 345 F.2d 778, 782 (9th Cir. 1965). cert. denied, 382 U.S. 996 (1966). Further, the Court has discretion to appoint counsel when "the interests of justice so require." Chaney, 801 F.2d at 1196. Petitioner has not made the necessary showing that appointment of counsel
Case 2:04-cv-00573-FJM Document 36 Filed 08/23/2005 Page 1 of 2

1 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 28

is warranted at this juncture in the proceedings. The Court assures Petitioner that the Court conducts a thorough review of the case, including applicable case law. If the Court feels that appointment of counsel is warranted to resolve the case, the Court will so order. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner's "Motion for Appointment of Counsel" filed August 18, 2005 is DENIED without prejudice for the reasons stated herein. DATED this 22nd day of August, 2005.

2 Case 2:04-cv-00573-FJM Document 36 Filed 08/23/2005 Page 2 of 2