Mcdonald v. Francis

Background

On November 7, 2025, Chattara Kelly filed on behalf of Shawnet Nickesha McDonald a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, a legal challenge to detention, under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The opinion states that Kelly, McDonald’s partner, filed as McDonald’s “next friend” while McDonald was present in the Southern District of New York.

Counsel request

The court considered the factors identified in Hodge v. Police Officers for deciding whether to seek volunteer counsel. Those factors include the apparent strength of the claim, the need for factual investigation, whether credibility disputes may arise, the litigant’s ability to present the case, and the complexity of the legal issues.

The court found that these factors favored seeking volunteer counsel. It emphasized that McDonald’s detention location, both when the petition was filed and currently, raised complex jurisdictional and other legal questions. The court also found that her incarceration and the emergency nature of the petition significantly limited her ability to present the case and conduct related fact investigation.

Order

The court directed the clerk to attempt to locate a volunteer lawyer to represent McDonald. It explained that the court has authority to request, but not require, an attorney to volunteer. The court warned that no volunteer may agree to take the case and that it might not locate another lawyer if the first effort failed. McDonald was therefore told to be prepared to continue without a lawyer. If she had already obtained counsel or did not want the court to seek volunteers, she was directed to notify the court.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The order did not decide the merits of McDonald’s detention petition.