From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davis v. Davis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
Jun 15, 2016
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:16-CV-110 (S.D. Tex. Jun. 15, 2016)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:16-CV-110

06-15-2016

MICHAEL A DAVIS, Petitioner, v. LORIE DAVIS, Respondent.


OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

Petitioner, an inmate incarcerated at the Tennessee Colony Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice - Correctional Institutions Division (TDCJ-CID) filed this petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition challenging the results of a disciplinary conviction he received while assigned to TDCJ-CID's McConnell Unit in Beeville, Texas. Pending is his motion for appointment of counsel (D.E. 8).

Although Petitioner has demonstrated that he is indigent and has been allowed to proceed in forma pauperis, his citation to state law regarding his request for appointment of counsel does not apply in federal courts. There is no constitutional right to counsel in federal habeas proceedings. Johnson v. Hargett, 978 F.2d 855 (5th Cir. 1992). Rule 8 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases requires that counsel be appointed if the habeas petition raises issues which mandate an evidentiary hearing. Service of process was only recently ordered on June 6, 2016 (D.E. 10), and at this point there are no issues that mandate an evidentiary hearing.

An evidentiary hearing will be scheduled and counsel will be assigned sua sponte if there are issues which mandate a hearing. Moreover, counsel may be assigned if discovery is ordered and issues necessitating the assignment of counsel are evident. Rule 6(a) of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases; Thomas v. Scott, 47 F.3d 713, 715 n. 1 (5th Cir. 1995). Accordingly, petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel (D.E. 8) is denied without prejudice.

ORDERED this 15th day of June, 2016.

/s/_________

B. JANICE ELLINGTON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Davis v. Davis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
Jun 15, 2016
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:16-CV-110 (S.D. Tex. Jun. 15, 2016)
Case details for

Davis v. Davis

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL A DAVIS, Petitioner, v. LORIE DAVIS, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

Date published: Jun 15, 2016

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:16-CV-110 (S.D. Tex. Jun. 15, 2016)