From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Waiters v. Head

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION
Apr 17, 2014
CIVIL NO. 5:14-CV-132-WLS-MSH (M.D. Ga. Apr. 17, 2014)

Opinion

CIVIL NO. 5:14-CV-132-WLS-MSH

04-17-2014

LATROY WAITERS, Petitioner, v. Warden FREDERICK J HEAD, Respondent.


PROCEEDINGS UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2254

BEFORE THE U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE


ORDER

Petitioner Latroy Waiters, a state prisoner, has filed an application for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and seeks to proceed without prepayment of the required filing fee or security therefor pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Based on Petitioner's submissions, the undersigned finds that Petitioner is presently unable to prepay the filing fee. Petitioner's Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is thus GRANTED.

Petitioner, however, has failed to use the standard § 2254 petition used by this Court. The Clerk shall thus forward Petitioner a copy of the Court's standard form for a § 2254 petition showing this case number. Plaintiff is ORDERED to complete this form and return it to the Court within TWENTY-ONE (21) DAYS from the date of this Order. While this action is pending, Petitioner shall also immediately inform the Court in writing of any change in his mailing address.

Petitioner's failure to comply with this Order may result in the dismissal of his application. There shall be no service of process in this case until further order.

Petitioner has also requested that the Court appoint counsel to assist him in this habeas action. (ECF No. 3) Generally, there is no right to legal representation in a federal habeas corpus proceeding. Wright v. West, 505 U.S. 277, 293 (1992). The Rules governing habeas cases "provide that appointment of counsel is proper if an evidentiary hearing is needed, if certain discovery is required, or 'if the interest of justice so requires' . . . ." Jones v. Thompson, 2010 WL 3909966 *2 (S.D. Ga. Oct. 5, 2010) (citing Rules 6(a) & 8(c) of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases). Petitioner's Motion is thus premature. Neither an evidentiary hearing nor discovery is required at this time; and until Petitioner submits his application on the Court's 42 U.S.C. § 2254 form and a responsive pleading is filed, the undersigned is unable to discern whether the interests of justice otherwise require the appointment of counsel. Petitioner's Motion for Appointment of Counsel (ECF No. 3) is DENIED.

Stephen Hyles

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Waiters v. Head

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION
Apr 17, 2014
CIVIL NO. 5:14-CV-132-WLS-MSH (M.D. Ga. Apr. 17, 2014)
Case details for

Waiters v. Head

Case Details

Full title:LATROY WAITERS, Petitioner, v. Warden FREDERICK J HEAD, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION

Date published: Apr 17, 2014

Citations

CIVIL NO. 5:14-CV-132-WLS-MSH (M.D. Ga. Apr. 17, 2014)