Source: http://ut.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20181017_0000799.DUT.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-09-24 08:46:28
Document Index: 234226927

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 2254', '§ 2254', '§ 2254', '§ 2241', '§ 2254', '§ 2254', '§ 2254', '§ 3006']

SEAN C. OWEN, Petitioner,
Having reviewed the habeas-corpus petition here, 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 (2018), the Court concludes that it should be amended to cure the below deficiencies if Petitioner wishes to further pursue his claims.
(b) is not on a Court-approved form.
(c) needs to specify a clear timeline regarding exhaustion of claim(s) in the appeals and post-conviction processes in the state courts and whether they have been concluded in the Utah Supreme Court.
Petitioner should consider the following points before refiling his petition. First, the revised petition must stand entirely on its own and shall not refer to, or incorporate by reference, any portion of the original petition or any other documents previously filed by Petitioner. See Murray v. Archambo, 132 F.3d 609, 612 (10th Cir. 1998) (amendment supersedes original). Second, Petitioner must clearly state whom his custodian is and name that person (a warden or ultimate supervisor of an imprisonment facility) as the respondent. See R. 2, Rs. Governing § 2254 Cases in the U.S. Dist. Courts. Third, Petitioner may generally not bring civil-rights claims as to his conditions of confinement in a habeas-corpus petition. Fourth, any claims about Petitioner's underlying conviction and/or sentencing should be brought under § 2254; any claims about the execution of Petitioner's sentence should be brought under § 2241. 28 U.S.C.S. §§ 2254, 2241 (2018). Fifth, Petitioner should seek help to prepare initial pleadings from legal resources (e.g., contract attorneys) available where he is held.
The Court now evaluates Petitioner's motion for appointed counsel. The Court initially notes that Petitioner has no constitutional right to appointed pro bono counsel in a federal habeas corpus case. See United States v. Lewis, No. 97-3135-SAC, 91-10047-01-SAC, 1998 WL 1054227, at *3 (D. Kan. December 9, 1998). Moreover, because no evidentiary hearing is required here, Petitioner has no statutory right to counsel. See Rule 8(c), R. Governing § 2254 Cases in U.S. Dist. Courts. However, the Court may in its discretion appoint counsel when "the interests of justice so require" for a "financially eligible person" bringing a § 2254 petition. See 18 U.S.C.S. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) (2018).