- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
HALE v. BURT
United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division.
Feb 1, 2006
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
AVERN COHN, District Judge
Before the Court is the Petitioner's Motion for Appointment of Counsel. Petitioner has no absolute right to be represented by counsel on habeas corpus review. Furthermore, neither an evidentiary hearing nor discovery have been requested or are necessary at this time. The interests of justice do not require appointment of counsel 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B); 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254, Rules 6(a) and 8(c).
Accordingly, the Court DENIES the motion WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Court will reconsider the motion if, following the receipt and review of the responsive pleading and Rule 5 materials, it is determined that appointment of counsel is necessary.
SO ORDERED.
x
Alert
Please log in or sign up for a free trial to access this feature.