From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kelly v. Romanowski

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION
Apr 30, 2012
Case No. 1:12-CV-11005 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 30, 2012)

Opinion

Case No. 1:12-CV-11005

04-30-2012

BERNARD KELLY, #526389, Petitioner, v. KENNETH ROMANOWSKI, Respondent.


Honorable Thomas L. Ludington


ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S APPLICATION

FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

This matter is before the Court on Petitioner Bernard Kelly's motion for appointment of counsel. In support of his request, Petitioner alleges that he is unable to afford counsel, that he is untrained in the law, and that the issues in his case are complex. Petitioner has submitted his habeas petition, but the respondent has not yet filed an answer to the petition or the state court record. Those materials are due on September 11, 2012.

Petitioner has no absolute right to be represented by counsel on federal habeas review. See Abdur-Rahman v. Michigan Dept. of Corrections, 65 F.3d 489, 492 (6th Cir. 1995); see also Wright v. West, 505 U.S. 277, 293 (1992) (citing Pennsylvania v. Finley, 481 U.S. 551, 555 (1987)). " '[A]ppointment of counsel in a civil case is . . . a matter within the discretion of the court. It is a privilege and not a right.' " Childs v. Pellegrin, 822 F.2d 1382, 1384 (6th Cir. 1987) (quoting United States v. Madden, 352 F.2d 792, 793 (9th Cir. 1965)). Petitioner has submitted his petition setting forth his claims, which were previously raised and briefed in the state courts. Neither an evidentiary hearing nor discovery are necessary at this time, and the interests of justice do not require appointment of counsel. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B); Rules 6(a) and 8(c) of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases.

Accordingly, Petitioner's application for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 3) is DENIED. The Court will bear in mind the request if, upon further review of the pleadings and state court record, the Court determines that appointment of counsel is necessary. Petitioner need not file an additional motion concerning this issue.

______________________

THOMAS L. LUDINGTON

United States District Judge

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means and on Bernard Kelly, #526389, Macomb Correction Facility, 34625 26 Mile Road, New Haven, MI 48048 by first class U.S. mail on April 30, 2012.

TRACY A. JACOBS


Summaries of

Kelly v. Romanowski

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION
Apr 30, 2012
Case No. 1:12-CV-11005 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 30, 2012)
Case details for

Kelly v. Romanowski

Case Details

Full title:BERNARD KELLY, #526389, Petitioner, v. KENNETH ROMANOWSKI, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Apr 30, 2012

Citations

Case No. 1:12-CV-11005 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 30, 2012)