Johnson v. Miller

341 Or. App. 850

Opinion

850 July 9, 2025 No. 636

This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON

MARTIN ALLEN JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jamie MILLER, Superintendent, Snake River Correctional Institution, Defendant-Respondent. Malheur County Circuit Court 23CV42211; A183020

Lung S. Hung, Judge. Submitted June 6, 2025. Jedediah Peterson and Equal Justice Law filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Jona J. Maukonen, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Tookey, Presiding Judge, Kamins, Judge, and Jacquot, Judge. PER CURIAM Affirmed. Nonprecedential Memo Op: 341 Or App 850 (2025) 851

PER CURIAM Petitioner appeals from a judgment dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, challenging the denial of his motion to appoint counsel. Petitioner argues that the trial court’s explanation for denying the motion—that it failed to state a claim for relief—is not “consistent with the purpose” of appointing counsel because one function of coun- sel is to help petitioner state a claim. We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioner’s motion. A habeas peti- tioner is “entitled to a ruling with sufficient explanation on the record in response to his motion to appoint counsel.” Steltz v. Cain, 325 Or App 560, 565, 529 P3d 284 (2023). The trial court explained its rationale and petitioner has not demonstrated that that rationale was incorrect. Affirmed.