Azeez v. John/Jane Doe

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided June 14, 2023·No. 7:22-cv-06028·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ABDOOL AZEEZ, 22-CV-6028 (LTS) Petitioner. ORDER LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Petitioner Abdool Azeez proceeds in this matter pro se. He seeks to challenge a state court conviction, but he does not identify the conviction. By order dated September 19, 2022, the Court directed Petitioner to complete a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 form, which was attached to the September 19, 2022, order, following Petitioner’s request that the court provide him with a

Section 2254 form. On October 14, 2022, the court’s Clerk’s Office received a letter from Petitioner, in which he stated that he did not intend to file his Section 2254 petition at that time. Rather, he stated, he was merely requesting that the Clerk’s Office provide him with a Section 2254 form, indicating that he was exhausting his unexhausted constitutional claims in the state courts, with the intent to return to this court upon completion of that exhaustion. Accordingly, on October 24, 2022, the Court denied the petition without prejudice to any Section 2254 petition Petitioner filed following his exhaustion in the state courts of his constitutional claims. On June 1, 2023, the Court received a letter from Petitioner, stating, “I do not know how to prepare my federal habeas corpus petition and I am kindly asking your honor if you can please assign me an attorney to prepare and file[ ] my federal corpus petition.” (ECF 11.)

As discussed below, the Court denies without prejudice Petitioner’s request for the appointment of counsel but grants him 60 days to complete the attached Section 2254 form. DISCUSSION A. Appointment of Counsel Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There is no constitutional right to counsel in habeas corpus proceedings. Where a court “determines that the interests of justice so require, representation may be provided for any financially eligible person who . . . is seeking relief under section 2241, 2254, or 2255 of title 28.” 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) (the Criminal

Justice Act (“CJA”)). In deciding whether to exercise its discretion to appoint counsel under the CJA, courts in this Circuit consider the same factors as those applicable to requests for pro bono counsel in other civil actions. See, e.g., Zimmerman v. Burge, 492 F. Supp. 2d 170, 176 n.1 (E.D.N.Y. 2007) (citing Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., 877 F.2d 170, 172 (2d Cir. 1989)); In re Pizzuti, 10 Civ. 199, 2010 WL 4968244, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 7, 2010). Those factors include the likelihood of success on the merits, the complexity of the legal issues, and the movant’s ability to investigate and present the case. See Cooper, 877 F.2d at 172; Hodge v. Police Officers, 802 F.2d 58, 61-62 (2d Cir. 1986). The Court has considered these factors and finds that appointment of counsel is not warranted at this time because Petitioner has not submitted a petition to determine whether the

appointment of counsel is warranted. Accordingly, the request for the appointment of counsel is denied without prejudice. Petitioner may reapply for appointment of counsel after he has submitted his completed Section 2254 form. B. Order to Reopen The Court construes Petitioner’s June 1, 2023, letter, dated May 29, 2023, as including a motion to reopen this action. The Court grants the request and directs the Clerk of Court to vacate the order of dismissal and the civil judgment. (ECF 8-9.) The Court also grants Petitioner 60 days to complete and submit the attached Section 2254 form. At this stage, Petitioner is only required to: (1) include the date his judgment of conviction was rendered and by which court, (2) the dates he filed his direct appeal and any post-conviction motions, (3) the dates his appeal and any post-conviction motions were decided, and (4) the grounds he seeks to raise in his Section 2254 petition, including any grounds he raised on direct appeal or in any post-conviction motion. If Petitioner believes that his petition is untimely, he must provide reasons why he did

not submit his petition on time. Petitioner is not required to provide any arguments at this stage; he must simply complete the attached form. CONCLUSION The Court directs the Clerk of Court to vacate the order of dismissal and the civil judgment. (ECF 8-9.) The Court also directs the Clerk of Court to reopen this action. The Court grants Petitioner 60 days from the date of this order to complete the attached Section 2254 form. The form must be submitted to the Clerk’s Office within 60 days of the date of this order, be captioned as an “Amended Petition,” and bear the same docket number as this order. A Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 form is attached to this order, which Petitioner should complete as

specified above. The Court denies Petitioner’s request for the appointment of counsel (ECF 11), without prejudice to renewal. SO ORDERED. Dated: June 14, 2023 New York, New York

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Azeez v. John/Jane Doe, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Azeez v. John/Jane Doe (Azeez v. John/Jane Doe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bennie Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., Inc.
877 F.2d 170 (Second Circuit, 1989)
Zimmerman v. Burge
492 F. Supp. 2d 170 (E.D. New York, 2007)