Court Opinion

ID: 9794656
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 03:09:15.260953+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:18:22.509433
License: Public Domain

On Petition for Rehearing
Original proceeding. Petition for a rehearing of his application for a writ of habeas corpus, brought by Herman Pelke, an inmate of the Montana State Prison, appearing pro se.
The petitioner alleges the same grounds for habeas corpus as were considered by this court in In re Petition of Herman Pelke. Without reiterating what was stated in that order concerning section 80-739, R.C.M.1947, (repealed) and section 94-7834, R.C.M.1947, we will say this, that although section 94-7834 states in part “that no person convicted and sentenced before the effective date shall have his rights and *359earned good time reduced by the application of this act”, petitioner has misconstrued the meaning of this portion of the statute which merely states that the act referred to shall not reduce a person’s good time. This statute in no manner attempts to prohibit the Board of Prison Commissioners from exercising their discretionary power as to the allowance or forfeiture of good time and their power to make such rules and regulations as are reasonable in connection with this power.
Therefore, the Board of Prison Commissioners could deprive petitioner of his good time for parole violations.
Petitioner also requests appointment of counsel to act in his behalf. Ordinarily the right to counsel does not exist in habeas corpus proceedings. In the absence of constitutional or statutory provisions to the contrary, the court may refuse to appoint counsel to represent a petitioner on the hearing and disposition of his petition. See Brown v. Johnston, 9 Cir., 91 F.2d 370; People ex rel. Ross v. Ragen, 391 Ill. 419, 63 N.E.2d 874, 162 A.L.R. 920; McGrath v. Tinsley, 138 Colo. 18, 328 P.2d 579; Cobas v. Clapp, 79 Idaho 419, 319 P.2d 475.
There is no provision in our law for appointment of counsel in this appellate court. Consideration is given all petitions for writs of habeas corpus upon the allegations contained therein and if it appears to us that a writ should issue, such writ is made returnable before an appropriate district court where facilities are available for holding the hearing.
Our statutes provide for assignment of counsel in a criminal action or proceeding by the district courts of Montana. Sections 94-6512 and 94-6513, R.C.M.1947. This matter was discussed in State ex rel. Irvine v. District Court, 125 Mont. 398, 239 P.2d 272.
Accordingly, deeming the petition without merit, it is denied.