Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 22, 2024

Niles v. Bragg

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:23-cv-09186
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
18
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Niles v. Executive Director, Judge Swain denied Niles’s request for appointed counsel without prejudice and ordered an amended petition form.

Who this affects

Paul Niles’s request for appointed counsel was denied without prejudice, and he was directed to complete and file an amended federal petition form. The order also denied fee-waiver status for an appeal from this order.

What happened

In Niles v. Executive Director, Paul Niles asked the Southern District of New York to appoint a lawyer to assist with his petition challenging a state conviction or sentence.

The court had previously allowed Niles to proceed without paying the filing fee and gave him 60 days to complete a petition form under federal law. It had also denied his earlier request for appointed counsel, while allowing him to renew that request later.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain denied Niles’s renewed request for counsel without prejudice, explaining that the case was still at an early stage. She directed the Clerk of Court to provide an amended petition form and denied fee-waiver status for any appeal from this order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Niles v. Bragg · No. 1:23-cv-09186
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Jan. 22, 2024

Background

Paul Niles is the petitioner, and the respondent is captioned as the Executive Director of Central New York Psychiatric Center. The case concerns a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the federal procedure for a person in state custody to challenge a state conviction or sentence.

In an order dated January 8, 2024, the court granted Niles permission to proceed without paying the filing fee. The court also gave him 60 days to complete and file a § 2254 petition form and denied his request for appointed habeas counsel, while allowing him to renew that request later.

Current Request

By letter dated January 12, 2024, Niles again requested appointment of counsel. The court stated that it was too early to conclude that the interests of justice required appointing a lawyer in this case.

Ruling

The court denied Niles’s application for appointed counsel without prejudice, meaning the request may be renewed at a later date. The Clerk of Court was directed to attach an amended petition form for Niles to complete and file.

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. It therefore denied permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for purposes of an appeal. The order did not decide the merits of Niles’s underlying challenge to his conviction or sentence.

The authoritative version

Read the full 18-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.