Michael Knaubert v. Goldsmith, Warden

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that § 3006A and due process do not require counsel where a district court properly declines an evidentiary hearing
• holding “[u]nless 3 || an evidentiary hearing is required, the decision to appoint counsel is within the discretion 4 the district court’
• holding 11 |/‘[uJnless an evidentiary hearing is required, the decision to appoint counsel is within the 12 discretion of the district court’
• holding 15 “[u]nless an evidentiary hearing is required, the decision to appoint counsel is within the 16 discretion of the district court”
• finding district court did not abuse its discretion in 20 failing to appoint habeas counsel where no evidentiary hearing was necessary
• questioning whether denial of the federal habeas petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel amounted to a denial of due process

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).