Moses K. v. McAleenan
- David Doty
- 0:19-cv-02035
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Moses K. v. McAleenan, Judge Thorson ordered respondents to answer the habeas petition, granted a fee waiver, and denied counsel without prejudice.
Moses K. may proceed without paying filing fees, but must litigate without appointed counsel for now; the respondents must file an answer and supporting materials within 30 days.
What happened
In Moses K. v. McAleenan, the court ordered the respondents to answer Moses K.’s petition challenging his confinement. They must explain the legal basis and length of the confinement, support their position with evidence and legal arguments, and recommend whether a hearing is needed.
The court also granted Moses K.’s application to proceed without paying filing fees. It said the request for appointed counsel was premature because the case had not yet been fully explained in the written filings, and denied that request without prejudice. Moses K. may reply within 30 days after the respondents file their answer.
Becky R. Thorson, the United States magistrate judge who signed the order, did not decide the merits of the habeas petition. The order instead set the briefing schedule and addressed fees and counsel.
The detailed version
- Moses K. v. McAleenan · No. 0:19-cv-02035
- David Doty
- Aug. 13, 2019
Background
Moses K. filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus concerning his confinement. The order does not describe the underlying claims in detail. The respondents are Kevin McAleenan, William Barr, Thomas Homan, Shawn Byers, and Joel Brott.
Rulings
The court directed the respondents to file an answer within 30 days. The answer must certify the true cause and proper duration of Moses K.’s confinement and show why the requested writ should not be granted. It must include affidavits and exhibits needed to establish the lawfulness and correct duration of the confinement, a reasoned memorandum explaining the respondents’ legal position on the claims, and the respondents’ recommendation about whether an evidentiary hearing should occur.
The court granted Moses K.’s application to proceed without paying filing fees. It denied the motion for appointment of counsel without prejudice. The court explained that civil litigants, including habeas petitioners, generally have no constitutional or statutory right to counsel, and that appointment may occur when the interests of justice require it. It found the motion premature because the case had not yet been adequately briefed.
Further proceedings and effect
Moses K. may file a reply within 30 days after the respondents file their answer. The court stated that no further submissions will be permitted unless authorized by court order. This order did not decide whether Moses K. is entitled to habeas relief; it required further briefing before the court considers the petition’s merits.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.