Golden v. United States

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA WESTERN DIVISION

CHRISTOPHER LEE GOLDEN, 5:24-CV-05003-ECS Plaintiff, ys. ORDER APPOINTING COUNSEL

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.

This matter is before the court pursuant to petitioner Christopher Lee Golden’s motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. This Court has determined that an evidentiary hearing is necessary to resolve a factual dispute regarding Mr. Golden’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim. A petitioner who seeks post-conviction relief such as Mr. Golden has no general right to have a lawyer appointed to assist her at the court’s expense because no post-conviction proceedings are usually civil in nature. Reagan v. Norris, 279 F.3d 651, 656 (8 Cir. 2002); see also United States v. Craycraft, 167 F.3d 451, 455 (8 Cir. 1999) (same). However, the court must appoint counsel to represent a financially eligible petitioner if an evidentiary hearing is deemed necessary by the court. Green v. United States, 262 F.3d 715, 716 □□□ Cir. 2001); see also Rules Governing § 2254 Cases, Rule 8(c), 28 U.S.C.A. foll. § 2254.

The Court has found that resolution of Mr. Golden’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim will necessitate the holding of an evidentiary hearing. The Court takes judicial notice that it previously found Mr. Golden eligible for court appointed counsel in his underlying criminal case. Accordingly, good cause appearing, it is hereby ORDERED that Ellery Grey is hereby appointed to represent the petitioner in the above entitled case, subject to Mr. Golden completing a financial affidavit, it being filed with the court, and the court’s review and approval of the same. DATED this 5th day of September, 2025. BY THE COURT: factelle DANETA WOLLMANN United States Magistrate Judge