McGary v. Strong

Filing 18

ORDER denying 11 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L Strombom.(CMG; cc to Plaintiff)

1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

7
8
9

DARNELL O MCGARY,

10
11
12
13

CASE NO. C14-5829 BHS-KLS

Petitioner,

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S
MOTION FOR COUNSEL

v.
MARK STRONG,
Respondent.

14
Petitioner Darnell McGary seeks an order appointing counsel in his habeas proceeding.
15
Dkt. 11. Having carefully considered the motion, the Court finds that it should be denied.
16
DISCUSSION
17
There is no constitutional right to the appointment of counsel in a federal habeas corpus
18
proceeding. McCleskey v. Zant, 499 U.S. 467, 495 (1991); Pennsylvania v. Finley, 481 U.S. 551,
19
555 (1987). If an evidentiary hearing is required, the Court may appoint counsel for a petitioner
20
who qualifies under 18 U.S.C. § 3006(A)(g). Rule 8(c), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. The Court may
21
also appoint counsel at an earlier stage of the proceedings if the interest of justice so requires. 18
22
U.S.C. § 3006(A); see also 21 U.S.C. 848(q); 28 U.S.C. § 2254(h); Terrovona v. Kincheloe, 912
23
F.2d 1176, 1181-82 (9th Cir. 1990); Dillon v. United States, 307 F.2d 445, 447 (9th Cir. 1962).
24
ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR
COUNSEL- 1

1 “In exercising its discretion, the district court should consider the legal complexity of the case,
2 the factual complexity of the case, and the petitioner’s ability to investigate and present his
3 claims, along with any other relevant factors.” Hoggard v. Purkett, 29 F.3d 469, 471 (8th Cir.
4 1994) (citing Abdullah v. Norris, 18 F.3d 571, 573 (8th Cir. 1994)).
5

Mr. McGary fails to show the appointment of counsel is necessary at this time. The

6 motion is at best premature. Respondent has not yet answered the petition, the Court has not
7 determined whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary, and Mr. McGary has not shown the case
8 presents complex legal or factual issues that would require the appointment of counsel in the
9 interests of justice.
10

Accordingly, the motion for appointment of counsel (Dkt. 11) is DENIED. The Clerk

11 shall send a copy of this Order to Petitioner and to counsel for Respondent.
12

DATED this 1st day of December, 2014.

13

A

14

Karen L. Strombom
United States Magistrate Judge

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR
COUNSEL- 2