Legal Opinion

TATE v. WARDEN

District Court, S.D. Indiana

Decided November 4, 2022No. 2:22-cv-00117Unknown

1Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA TERRE HAUTE DIVISION REGINALD TATE, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) No. 2:22-cv-00117-JPH-MG ) WARDEN, ) ) Respondent. ) Order Denying Motion for Appointment of Counsel and Granting Motion for Status Update Petitioner Reginald Tate's motions seeking the appointment of counsel to represent him in litigating his petition for writ of habeas corpus under

28 U.S.C. § 2241

have been considered. The authority for appointing counsel in an action seeking relief under § 2241 comes from the Criminal Justice Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A. See 18 U.S.C. §…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Pruitt v. MoteCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007
  2. McFarland v. ScottSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  3. Clyde Piggie v. Zettie Cotton, Cylde Piggie v. Zettie CottonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2003
  4. Larry Winsett v. Odie Washington, Warden of Dixon Correctional CenterCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1997
  5. United States v. Lawrence SarsounCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1988

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API