Butler v. Sachse

Filing 21

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. No. 17 ) is DENIED. If the Court later determines that counsel is necessary, it will issue an appropriate order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Terry I. Adelman on 06/19/2013. (DJO)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
MICHAEL JEROME BUTLER,
Petitioner,
v.
JENNIFER SACHSE,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:12CV222 ERW
(TIA)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel. The
cause was referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).
On February 2, 2012, petitioner filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a writ of habeas
corpus, raising four grounds for federal habeas relief. Respondent filed her Response on May 5,
2012. Petitioner then filed a supplemental pleading, further articulating his claims. On October 18,
2012, Petitioner filed a motion for appointment of counsel, alleging that he is unable to afford counsel
because of his poverty and that his case involves complex issues. Thus, he requests that the court
appoint him an attorney.
“[T]here is neither a constitutional nor statutory right to counsel in habeas proceedings . . .”
McCall v. Benson, 114 F.3d 754, 756 (8th Cir. 1997). In order to determine whether appointment
of counsel is appropriate, the court must consider “the factual and legal complexity of the case, and
the petitioner’s ability both to investigate and to articulate his claims without court appointed
counsel.” Id. (citations omitted). In the instant case, Petitioner raises only four grounds for habeas
relief, and they do not appear to be factually or legally complex. Further, Petitioner has thus far been
able to articulate his claims in a clear, concise manner, despite his allegations of mental impairment.

Because petitioner has demonstrated an ability to adequately present his claims without an attorney,
his motion for appointment of counsel will be denied at this time.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. No.
17) is DENIED. If the Court later determines that counsel is necessary, it will issue an appropriate
order.

/s/ Terry I. Adelman
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Dated this 19th day of June, 2013.