From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Taylor v. Steele

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Mar 31, 1952
194 F.2d 864 (8th Cir. 1952)

Opinion

No. 14526.

March 7, 1952. Rehearing Denied March 31, 1952.

Before GARDNER, Chief Judge, and SANBORN, WOODROUGH, THOMAS, JOHNSEN, RIDDICK and COLLET, Circuit Judges.


An examination of the record in this case has convinced this court that this appeal prosecuted in forma pauperis is frivolous, Garcia v. Steele, 8 Cir., 193 F.2d 276, 278-279, Williams v. Steele, 8 Cir., 194 F.2d 32, and that the appellant's application for the appointment of counsel to represent him should have been denied.

A Court of Appeals will not appoint counsel for an indigent appellant unless it appears that his appeal has merit. Gargano v. United States, 9 Cir., 140 F.2d 118; Application of Taylor, 7 Cir., 139 F.2d 1018; Kelly v. United States, 9 Cir., 135 F.2d 919; Ligare v. Harries, 7 Cir., 128 F.2d 582. See also Kinney v. Plymouth Rock Squab Co., 236 U.S. 43, 45, 35 S.Ct. 236, 59 L.Ed. 457; Gilmore v. United States, 8 Cir., 131 F.2d 873, 874.

The order of this court entered February 15, 1952, appointing counsel for the appellant is vacated and the appeal is dismissed upon the ground that it is frivolous within the meaning of Section 1915, Title 28 U.S.C.A.


Summaries of

Taylor v. Steele

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Mar 31, 1952
194 F.2d 864 (8th Cir. 1952)
Case details for

Taylor v. Steele

Case Details

Full title:TAYLOR v. STEELE

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

Date published: Mar 31, 1952

Citations

194 F.2d 864 (8th Cir. 1952)

Citing Cases

Weber v. United States

An appeal in forma pauperis is a privilege, not a right; no requirement of due process is involved. If…

Turner v. United States

His fourth motion to vacate was repetitious and without any color of merit. This appeal is dismissed as…