John Collins v. Robert A. Heinze, Warden of California State Prison at Folsom

On the grounds and for the reasons stated in its opinion, Collins v. Heinze, D.C.N.D.Cal., 125 F.Supp. 186, the judgement of the District Court is affirmed. An alleged error not covered by the District Court’s opinion has been presented, towit, that the District Court erred in refusing to appoint counsel to represent appellant in the presentation of the petition for the writ of habeas corpus in the District Court. A habeas corpus proceeding is in the nature of a civil action and, hence, there is no requirement that counsel be appointed in such a proceeding.