Davis v. United States
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:22-cv-01131
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Davis v. United States, Judge Ramos denied without prejudice Davis’s request for pro bono counsel because his claims did not appear likely to have merit.
Raheen Davis, the incarcerated petitioner representing himself and seeking appointment of pro bono counsel.
What happened
In Davis v. United States, Raheen Davis, who was representing himself and was incarcerated, asked the court to seek a volunteer lawyer for his petition to vacate his sentence. He said he had limited access to legal resources and also wanted to file a new petition and appeal an earlier dismissal.
The court explained that it could ask lawyers on its volunteer panel to represent an eligible person but could not force a lawyer to take the case. The court first had to decide whether Davis’s claims appeared likely to have merit, and it concluded that they did not appear likely to succeed based on its earlier orders.
Judge Edgardo Ramos denied Davis’s request for pro bono counsel without prejudice. The order addressed only the request for a lawyer, not the merits of Davis’s sentence-vacation petition.
The detailed version
- Davis v. United States · No. 1:22-cv-01131
- Edgardo Ramos
- Mar. 10, 2022
Background
Raheen Davis, proceeding without a lawyer, filed letters asking the court to request pro bono counsel—an attorney willing to represent him without charging him—for his petition seeking to vacate his sentence. Davis stated that he was incarcerated and had limited access to legal resources. He also told the court that he intended to file a new petition if counsel were appointed and wanted to appeal the court’s February 14, 2022 order dismissing his petition. The order also lists a related criminal docket, 08 Cr. 76 (ER).
Legal standard
The court explained that federal courts generally cannot require attorneys to represent people in civil cases. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), however, the court may use its discretion to ask its Pro Se Office to seek a volunteer attorney through the court’s Pro Bono Panel. The court must first determine whether the person’s claims appear likely to have merit. If that threshold is met, the court considers additional factors, including whether the person can gather facts and present the case without a lawyer.
Ruling
Based on the nature of Davis’s claims as discussed in the court’s earlier orders dismissing his petition and denying his request for reconsideration, the court could not conclude that the claims were likely to have merit. The court therefore DENIED without prejudice Davis’s application for appointment of pro bono counsel. The order does not decide the merits of the sentence-vacation petition itself. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail Davis a copy of the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.