Beals v. Farrell

Filing 15

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER #95677 denying, without prejudice re: 8 APPLICATION to Appoint Counsel pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3006(A)(g) (Habeas Corpus Petition), filed by Raymond Beals. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Ronald L. Ellis on 2/5/08) (cd)

Beals v. Farrell

Doc. 15

Case 1:07-cv-04540-PAC-RLE

Document 15

Filed 02/05/2008

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
<

RAYMOND BEALS, Plaintiff, - against ACTING SUP. DEP. FARRELL, Defendant. RONALD L. ELLIS, United States Magistrate Judge:

: : : : : : : : :
<

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER 07 Civ. 4540 (PAC) (RLE)

I. INTRODUCTION Petitioner, Raymond Beals ("Beals"), seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On July 19, 2007, Beals filed an application for appointment of counsel. For the reasons that follow, Beals's request for counsel is DENIED. II. DISCUSSION Civil litigants, unlike criminal defendants, do not have a constitutional right to the appointment of counsel. However, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), "[t]he court may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel." In determining whether to appoint counsel for an indigent civil litigant, the Court considers numerous factors, and "exercises substantial discretion, subject to the requirement that it be guided by sound legal principles." Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., 877 F.2d 170, 172 (2d Cir. 1989) (internal citations omitted). The Court's first inquiry is whether Plaintiff can afford to obtain counsel. See Terminate Control Corp. v. Horowitz, 28 F.3d 1335, 1341 (2d Cir. 1994). If the Court finds that Beals cannot afford counsel, it must then examine the merits of his case and "determine whether the indigent's position seems likely to be of substance." Hodge v. Police Officers, 802 F.2d 58, 61 (2d Cir.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 1:07-cv-04540-PAC-RLE

Document 15

Filed 02/05/2008

Page 2 of 2