Stewart v. Collado

Background

Wayne Stewart, a self-represented petitioner in a habeas corpus proceeding, asked the court to appoint pro bono counsel. He also asked for additional time to file reply papers, which had been due July 26, 2024. Stewart cited difficulties related to his health and incarceration, as well as the length of the government’s opposition.

Appointment of Counsel

The court explained that a request for appointed counsel in a habeas proceeding is evaluated under the same standard used for civil cases. The court considers the apparent merit of the claims, the person’s ability to pay for a private lawyer, efforts to obtain counsel, the availability of lawyers, and the person’s ability to investigate facts and address legal issues without assistance. The likelihood that the claims have substance is the most important initial factor.

The court concluded that these considerations did not favor appointing counsel at that point. The habeas petition and the government’s opposition had already been filed, and the case would be decided on the written record. As a result, a lawyer appointed at that late stage would have limited ability to assist Stewart or affect the outcome. The court also stated that prisoners do not have a constitutional right to counsel for post-conviction relief.

The court therefore denied Stewart’s application for appointment of counsel. It noted that the question could be reconsidered if the court later decided that an evidentiary hearing was necessary.

Additional Time

The court allowed Stewart additional time to file his reply. The new deadline was September 6, 2024.

Disposition

Judge James L. Cott denied the request for appointed counsel and extended the reply deadline to September 6, 2024. The order did not decide the underlying habeas petition.