Court Opinion

ID: 9541052
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 16:22:10.035518+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:02:28.617564
License: Public Domain

PRENTICE, Justice,
concurring.
I concur in the result reached by the majority, but I do not agree that Ind.R.P.C. 1, § 9(a) precludes a trial judge from appointing counsel, other than the Public Defender, to represent an indigent post conviction petitioner, in an appropriate case. What appears to me, is that, absent a clear showing that the Public Defender cannot, or probably would not, adequately represent the petitioner, there is no duty to appoint other counsel. In this case the petitioner’s allegations did not state a prima facie case, and the motion was properly overruled, without further inquiry.