Filing 9

ENTRY denying 8 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 11/9/2012. Copy Mailed. (JD) Modified to opinion on 11/9/2012 (JD).

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA DAVID PANNELL, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) vs. ) ) SUPERINTENDENT, Indiana State ) Prison, ) ) Respondent. ) 1:12-cv-01301-TWP-DML ENTRY The petitioner’s motion for the appointment of counsel has been considered. The Sixth Amendment right to counsel does not apply in habeas corpus actions. Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 755 (1991). However, a district court does have the authority to appoint counsel to represent a habeas petitioner whenever it "determines that the interests of justice so require. . . ." 18 U.S.C. ' 3006A(a)(2)(B). Whether to appoint counsel is committed to the discretion of the trial court. United States v. Evans, 51 F.3d 287 (10th Cir. 1995). Factors which the court may consider include: (1) whether the merits of the indigent's claim are colorable; (2) ability of the indigent to investigate crucial facts; (3) whether the nature of the evidence indicates that the truth will more likely be exposed where both sides are represented by counsel; (4) capability of the indigent to present his case; and (5) complexity of the legal issues raised by the complaint. Wilson v. Duckworth, 716 F.2d 415, 418 (7th Cir. 1983). Application of the foregoing factors in this case indicates that the petitioner=s claims are not particularly complex, that there is no likelihood that an evidentiary hearing will be necessary, that no discovery or other investigation will be required, that due allowance to the petitioner=s pro se status will be made and that the petitioner has at least thus far demonstrated adequate ability to express and present his claims. In addition, the petitioner has the means (writing materials, etc.) to continue to present his claims in this action; the petitioner is literate and seems fully aware of the proceedings involving his conviction and sentence in the Indiana state courts. These are not circumstances in which it is in the interest of justice to appoint counsel for the petitioner, and for this reason his motion for appointment of counsel [Dkt. 8] is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED. 11/09/2012 Date: __________________ Distribution: David Pannell DOC #963265 Indiana State Prison Inmate Mail/Parcels One Park Row Michigan City, IN 46360 ________________________ Hon. Tanya Walton Pratt, Judge United States District Court Southern District of Indiana

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?