Moore v. Wallace

Filing 10

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioners motion for appointment of Counsel, for an evidentiary hearing, and to expand the record is DENIED. (Doc. No. 9.) re: 9 MOTION for Leave to Expand the Record MOTION for Hearing MOTION to Appoint Counsel filed by Petitioner Patrick Moore, Jr. Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 8/28/13. (JWJ)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION PATRICK MOORE, JR., Petitioner, vs. IAN WALLACE, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 4:13CV00184 AGF MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on habeas Petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel, for an evidentiary hearing, and to expand the record. There is no constitutional right for a pro se habeas petitioner to have counsel appointed, although the Court has discretion to appoint an attorney when necessary. Morris v. Dormire, 217 F.3d 556, 558 (8th Cir. 2000). Among the factors a court should consider in making this determination are the factual and legal complexity of the case, the ability of the petitioner to present the facts and present his claims, and the degree to which the petitioner and the Court would benefit from such an appointment. Id. Upon review of the record, the Court does not believe that the appointment of counsel is necessary here. Nor is an evidentiary hearing necessary at this stage of the litigation. The relevant state court records have been provided by Respondent, and Petitioner does not identify any additional records that are needed by the Court to resolve Petitioner’s claims. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion for appointment of Counsel, for an evidentiary hearing, and to expand the record is DENIED. (Doc. No. 9.) ___________________________________ AUDREY G. FLEISSIG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated this 28th day of August, 2013.

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?