Legal Opinion
Freeman v. United States
District Court, D. South Dakota
Decided October 21, 2024No. 4:24-cv-04174Unknown
1Opinion
DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION JUQURRY FREEMAN, 4:24-CV-04174-KES Movant, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL vs. DOCKET NO. 7 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. Movant Juqurry Freeman has filed a pro se motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. He has now filed a motion seeking court-appointed counsel in this matter. It is well settled that A[a] habeas corpus proceeding is civil in nature, and >the Sixth Amendment right to counsel afforded for criminal proceedings does not apply.= @ Hoggard v. Purkett,
29 F.3d 469, 471
(8th Cir. 1994)…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Thompson v. NixCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1990
- Michael Hoggard v. James Purkett, SuperintendentCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1994
- Hiawatha Nash v. Lee Roy Black, David Blackwell, Dale Riley, Gerald T. Frey, Donna Kay Brown and Mike CurranCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1986
- John Ameen Abdullah v. Larry Norris, Acting Director, Arkansas Department of CorrectionCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1994
- Gerald Boyd v. Michael GrooseCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1993
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.