COOPER v. SUPERINTENDENT CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
ENTRY - The petitioner's motion for the appointment of counsel [dkt 7 ] is denied. (See entry.) Copy to Petitioner via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 11/21/2016. (JLS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
The petitioner’s motion for the appointment of counsel in this action for habeas corpus
relief has been considered. Such a motion may be granted where the court finds it is in the interests
of justice to make such appointment. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). Courts have made
appointment of counsel the exception rather than the rule by limiting it to: (1) capital cases; (2)
cases that turn on substantial and complex procedural, legal or mixed legal and factual questions;
(3) cases involving uneducated or mentally or physically impaired petitioners; (4) cases likely to
require the assistance of experts either in framing or in trying the claims; (5) cases in which
petitioner is in no position to investigate crucial facts; and (6) factually complex cases. See
generally 1 J. Liebman & R. Hertz, Federal Habeas Corpus Practice and Procedure § 12.3b at
383-86 (2d ed. 1994).
This habeas action brought by a state prisoner. He has shown that he is very familiar with
the pertinent facts. Although the action is at an early stage, it can be anticipated that the record will
be appropriately expanded. No discovery is warranted and no evidentiary hearing or other unusual
proceedings are likely. There are no extraordinary circumstances in this case and the circumstances
just noted above do not show that it is in the interests of justice that counsel be appointed for the
The petitioner’s motion for the appointment of counsel [dkt 7] is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
PENDLETON - CIF
CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
5124 West Reformatory Road
PENDLETON, IN 46064
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?