Case ID: f-appx_283/html/0217-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Robert W. CLARK, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 07-30660
    Conference Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    June 19, 2008.
    Cristina Walker, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Robert W. Clark, Jr., Forrest City, AR, pro se.
    Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Robert W. Clark, Jr., federal prisoner # 09895-035, seeks leave to proceed in for-ma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the district court’s denial of his motion for appointment of counsel. Clark was convicted of conspiracy to distribute 50 or more grams of cocaine base (crack) and distribution of 50 or more grams of crack and was sentenced, in 1999, to 360 months of imprisonment on the conspiracy count and 240 months of imprisonment on the distribution count. We affirmed Clark’s conviction and sentence on direct appeal. Clark previously filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, which the district court denied, and he was denied a certificate of appealability by this court.

Clark thereafter filed in the district court two freestanding motions for appointment of counsel, which the district court denied. This appeal followed. The district court denied Clark leave to proceed IFP on appeal.

As Clark had no proceeding pending in the district court at the time he requested appointment of counsel, Clark has not shown that the “interests of justice” required that the district court appoint counsel to represent him. Schwander v. Blackburn, 750 F.2d 494, 502 (5th Cir.1985). Because Clark’s appeal is frivolous and wholly without merit, see Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.1983), his IFP motion is denied and his appeal is dismissed. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.