Crummie v. Bauman, No. 2:2015cv12723 - Document 24 (E.D. Mich. 2019)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER Denying 20 Motion to Appoint Counsel and 21 Motion For a Scheduling Order. Signed by District Judge Victoria A. Roberts. (LVer)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Crummie v. Bauman Doc. 24 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ROBERT QUINTONE CRUMMIE, Petitioner, v. Civil No. 2:15-CV-12723 HONORABLE VICTORIA A. ROBERTS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE CATHERINE BAUMAN, Respondent, ___________________________________/ OPINION AND ORDER DENYING THE MOTION FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AND THE MOTION FOR A SCHEDULING ORDER Robert Quintone Crummie, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The petition was denied with prejudice. Petitioner filed a motion for the appointment of counsel and a related motion for a scheduling order, asking for time to allow appointed counsel to file additional pleadings. For the reasons that follow, the motions are DENIED. There is no constitutional right to counsel in habeas proceedings. Cobas v. Burgess, 306 F. 3d 441, 444 (6th Cir. 2002). Petitioner’s habeas claims lack merit; the motion for the appointment of counsel and the related motion for a scheduling order are denied. See Lemeshko v. Wrona, 325 F. Supp. 2d 778, 788 (E.D. Mich. 2004). IT IS ORDERED That: The motion for the appointment of counsel (ECF 20) and the motion for a scheduling order (ECF 21) are DENIED. Dated: 7/30/19 s/ Victoria A. Roberts HON. VICTORIA A. ROBERTS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
