Leonor v. Houston
Filing
92
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Petitioner's Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Filing No. 89 ) is denied. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
JUAN LUIS LEONOR,
Petitioner,
v.
ROBERT HOUSTON,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
4:05CV3162
MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on Petitioner Juan Luis Leonor’s (“Petitioner”)
Motion for Appointment of Counsel. (Filing No. 89.) “There is neither a constitutional nor
statutory right to counsel in habeas proceedings; instead, [appointment] is committed to the
discretion of the trial court.” McCall v. Benson, 114 F.3d 754, 756 (8th Cir. 1997). As a
general rule, counsel will not be appointed unless the case is unusually complex or the
petitioner’s ability to investigate and articulate the claims is unusually impaired or an
evidentiary hearing is required. See, e.g., Morris v. Dormire, 217 F.3d 556, 558-59 (8th
Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 984 (2000); Hoggard v. Purkett, 29 F.3d 469, 471 (8th
Cir. 1994) (citations omitted). See also Rule 8(c) of the Rules Governing Section 2254
Cases in the United States District Courts (requiring appointment of counsel if an
evidentiary hearing is warranted.) The court has carefully reviewed the record and finds
that there is no need for the appointment of counsel at this time.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Petitioner’s Motion for Appointment of
Counsel (Filing No. 89) is denied.
DATED this 4th day of March, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
Richard G. Kopf
Senior United States District Judge
*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District Court for the District
of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide
on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The court
accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to
work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.
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?