Durbin v. Province, No. 6:2007cv00262 - Document 35 (E.D. Okla. 2010)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER by District Judge James H. Payne denying second motion for appointment of counsel; denying 32 Motion for Appointment of Counsel (lsa, Chambers)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA FREDERICK LEE DURBIN, Petitioner, v. GREG PROVINCE, Warden, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CIV 07-262-JHP-KEW OPINION AND ORDER DENYING SECOND MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL Petitioner has filed a second motion requesting the court to appoint counsel [Docket #32]. He still bears the burden of convincing the court that his claim has sufficient merit to warrant appointment of counsel. McCarthy v. Weinberg, 753 F.2d 836, 838 (10th Cir. 1985) (citing United States v. Masters, 484 F.2d 1251, 1253 (10th Cir. 1973)). The court again has carefully reviewed the merits of petitioner s claim, the nature of factual issues raised in his allegations, and his ability to investigate crucial facts. McCarthy, 753 F.2d at 838 (citing Maclin v. Freake, 650 F.2d 885, 887-88 (7th Cir. 1981)). After examining petitioner s ability to present his claims and the complexity of the legal issues raised by the claims, the court finds that appointment of counsel still is not warranted. See Williams v. Meese, 926 F.2d 994, 996 (10th Cir. 1991); See also Rucks v. Boergermann, 57 F.3d 978, 979 (10th Cir. 1995). ACCORDINGLY, petitioner's motion [Docket #32] is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED this 18th day of October 2010.
]]>
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.
