Rodriguez v. United States
- James Oetken
- 1:19-cv-11526
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Rodriguez v. United States, Judge Failla appointed counsel for Rodriguez’s planned motion challenging his federal conviction.
Jose Hernando Rodriguez and the United States; the order also appointed Georgia Hinde as Rodriguez’s counsel for the anticipated motion.
What happened
In Rodriguez v. United States, the Second Circuit allowed Jose Hernando Rodriguez to file another request challenging his conviction under federal law. The request would address how a Supreme Court decision might affect his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(j).
The court considered the complexity of the legal issues, the likelihood of success, and Rodriguez’s ability to investigate and present the case. It found that the legal issues justified appointing a lawyer.
Judge Katherine Polk Failla appointed Georgia Hinde, who had represented Rodriguez in the underlying criminal case, to represent him in the anticipated motion. The court also set deadlines for Rodriguez’s amended motion, the government’s response, and any reply.
The detailed version
- Rodriguez v. United States · No. 1:19-cv-11526
- James Oetken
- Feb. 22, 2021
Background
The Second Circuit granted Jose Hernando Rodriguez permission to file a successive motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. That statute allows a federal prisoner to challenge a conviction or sentence in certain circumstances. The anticipated motion would address the effect of the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Davis on Rodriguez’s conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. § 924(j).
Appointment of Counsel
The court explained that there is no constitutional right to a lawyer in a § 2255 proceeding. The Criminal Justice Act nevertheless allows a court to appoint counsel for an indigent person when the interests of justice require it. In the Second Circuit, courts consider factors used for requests for free counsel in civil cases, including the likelihood of success, the complexity of the legal issues, and the person’s ability to investigate and present the case.
Because the Second Circuit identified complex legal issues in Rodriguez’s anticipated motion, the court found that appointing counsel was justified. The court appointed Georgia Hinde, who had previously represented Rodriguez in his underlying criminal case, to represent him in the anticipated § 2255 motion.
Deadlines and Disposition
The court ordered that Rodriguez’s amended motion and supporting papers be filed by March 16, 2021. The government’s opposition, if any, was due April 13, 2021, and Rodriguez’s reply papers, if any, were due April 27, 2021. The court directed the clerk to file the order in both the civil and criminal case numbers and requested that Hinde send Rodriguez a copy.
This order addressed appointment of counsel and scheduling; it did not decide the merits of Rodriguez’s anticipated § 2255 motion.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.