Pennell v. Pash

Filing 11

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel [Doc. 7] is DENIED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's motion for extension of time to file an amended application for w rit of habeas corpus on a court-form [Doc. 9] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall provide petitioner with a form for filing a "Petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a person in State Cus tody." IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner shall complete, sign and return the form petition within sixty (60) days of the date of this Memorandum and Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's failure to comply with this Court 9;s Order will result in a dismissal of this action, without prejudice.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Shirley P. Mensah on 4/15/16. (copy of Petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a person in State Custody mailed to petitioner)(LGK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
MICHAEL M. PENNELL,
Petitioner,
v.
RONDA J. PASH,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:16CV352 SPM

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel, as well
as petitioner’s motion for extension of time to file an amended petition for writ of habeas corpus.
After review of this action, petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel will be denied without
prejudice. However, petitioner’s motion for extension of time to file an amended petition will be
granted.
In deciding whether to appoint counsel, this Court considers “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.” Morris v. Dormire, 217 F.3d 556, 558–59 (8th Cir.2000)
(internal quotations omitted). “[T]here is neither a constitutional nor statutory right to counsel in
habeas proceedings.” Id. at 558 (internal quotations omitted). Petitioner has pursued his claims at
times pro se, or sometimes in combination with his assigned counsel, in his direct and postconviction proceedings.1 The record is fully developed; the legal issues are not complex or novel.
Accordingly, petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel will be denied.

1

The Court has reviewed these proceedings on Missouri.Case.Net. As evidenced in his appeal of
his post-conviction proceedings, petitioner has a habit of claiming ineffective assistance of

However, petitioner’s motion for extension of time to file his amended application for
writ of habeas corpus will be granted. Petitioner will be given sixty (60) days from the date of
this Memorandum and Order to file his amended petition on a court-form.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel [Doc.
#7] is DENIED without prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for extension of time to file an
amended application for writ of habeas corpus on a court-form [Doc. #9] is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall provide petitioner with a
form for filing a "Petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a person in
State Custody."
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner shall complete, sign and return the form
petition within sixty (60) days of the date of this Memorandum and Order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner’s failure to comply with this Court’s Order
will result in a dismissal of this action, without prejudice.

SHIRLEY PADMORE MENSAH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Dated this 15th day of April, 2016.

appointed counsel, and/or abandonment of counsel, when counsel fail to make his proposed
arguments that counsel have deemed legally frivolous.
2