I. LEO GLASSER, United States District Judge.
On January 19th, 2001, the petitioner filed a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 seeking an order of this Court that would vacate, set aside or correct a sentence imposed on February 18th, 1999. The government's opposition was filed on May 15th, 2001, and a request of the petitioner to extend the time within which to file a reply was granted as to August 20th, 2001.
In the interim, in motions dated July 15th and filed with the Court on July 23rd, 2001, the petitioner sought orders of the Court appointing counsel to represent him; to strike the government's response to his motion; to "expand the record and grant a prompt evidentiary hearing" and to stay the Court's order requiring his reply to be filed within the time as extended.
As regards his request for the appointment of counsel, a careful review of the issues presented by his § 2255 motion and of the factors discussed by the Court in Hodge v. Police Officers, 802 F.2d 58 (2d Cir. 1986) and Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., Inc., 877 F.2d 170 (2d Cir. 1989) leads the Court to conclude that the petitioner's "chances of success are extremely slim." United States v. Helmsley, 941 F.2d 71, 98 (2d Cir. 1991); Douglas v. United States, 13 F.3d 43, 46 (2d Cir. 1993) a requirement which the Court is admonished to take seriously and does. Accordingly, his request for appointment of counsel is denied.
His other motions are patently frivolous and also are denied.
SO ORDERED.