From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Walker v. Jones

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Oct 10, 2012
No. CIV 12-303-RAW-KEW (E.D. Okla. Oct. 10, 2012)

Opinion

No. CIV 12-303-RAW-KEW

10-10-2012

JULIUS JEROME WALKER, Petitioner, v. JUSTIN JONES, Respondent.


OPINION AND ORDER

DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

Petitioner has filed a motion requesting the court to appoint counsel. He bears the burden of convincing the court that his claim has sufficient merit to warrant appointment of counsel. McCarthy v. Weinberg, 753 F.2d 836, 838 (10th Cir. 1985) (citing United States v. Masters, 484 F.2d 1251, 1253 (10th Cir. 1973)). The court has carefully reviewed the merits of petitioner's claim, the nature of factual issues raised in his allegations, and his ability to investigate crucial facts. McCarthy, 753 F.2d at 838 (citing Maclin v. Freake, 650 F.2d 885, 887-88 (7th Cir. 1981)). After considering petitioner's ability to present his claims and the complexity of the legal issues raised by the claims, the court finds that appointment of counsel is not warranted. See W illiams v. Meese, 926 F.2d 994, 996 (10th Cir. 1991); See also Ruck s v. Bo ergermann, 57 F.3d 978, 979 (10th Cir. 1995)

ACCORDINGLY, petitioner's motion [Docket #12] is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 10 day of October 2012.

___________________

RONALD A. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Walker v. Jones

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Oct 10, 2012
No. CIV 12-303-RAW-KEW (E.D. Okla. Oct. 10, 2012)
Case details for

Walker v. Jones

Case Details

Full title:JULIUS JEROME WALKER, Petitioner, v. JUSTIN JONES, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

Date published: Oct 10, 2012

Citations

No. CIV 12-303-RAW-KEW (E.D. Okla. Oct. 10, 2012)