Free Order on Motion to Appoint Counsel - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 73.2 kB
Pages: 1
Date: February 23, 2004
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 436 Words, 2,786 Characters
Page Size: 612.72 x 1008 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/20119/23.pdf

Download Order on Motion to Appoint Counsel - District Court of Connecticut ( 73.2 kB)


Preview Order on Motion to Appoint Counsel - District Court of Connecticut
TAX I_%.i.]:._ ; E: $ . . § _;, iii? i,__. . w : `;, i r _ ;;€ ; I; g i ? ] ;; :£ ! ; :. j.;.,_ . g__ _ -} L - ` · _ . ' N E
p N ,€.. l . .· T - ])uLf)•;g *1;;1' N
R . I UN D STATES DISRICT COURT On whl 2
; ] DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT i
JQS E AUGUS E #260549 _ A _I]I. . —~ _
T3E~TT0NzR — .: · I
`I V. _ - ‘ " DOCKET # iii?) `
SSE NGE et. sal; __ - 3:02CV1922(R. .C)
A_ ONDENT L.j.rI _. ·— -
A I U .T.. - .
A I PETTTTSN TO APPOINT c6UNSEL°“° °‘ g
]
I I
I COMES NOW JOSUE AUGUSTE [FURTHER KNOWN AS THE PETITIONER SEEKS THAT l
THIS HONORABLE COURT RECONSIDER PETITIONERS MOTION FOR APPONTMENT OF `I
ICOUNSEL (DOC.#8) FOR THE PETITIONER FOR JUST CAUSE;AS JUDGEMENT WAS I
ENTEREDTT0 DENIE ABOVE_SNTBNMOTEGN"WITHUUTYPREJUDIGET “YM?Y"”` i
I I
_ (1) THERE ARE MITIGATING FACTORS IN THIS CASE THAT NEED TO BE PROPERLY V
PRESENTED BEFORE THIS HONORABLE COURT.
1 ` 5
C2) THE PETITIONER IS A LAYPERSON WITH THE LAW AND LACK THE LEGAL E
EXPERTISE TO CQNDUCT PROPER LITIGATION AGAINST DISRICT COUNSEL
(3) AS A PRISONER HELD IN CUSTODY, THE ACCESS TO MATERIALS ARE IN-
IADEOUATE, AND OBTAINING COPIES FOR TIME LIMITED DEADLINES SEEM T0 BE
INSUFFICIENT TO MEET THE CONTINUED DEMAND OF LAW.(LETTER FROM LIBRARY I
IAND SCOOL PRINCIPEE STATING CERTAIN LAW MATERIALS ARE NOT PRESENT IN T
THE INSTITUTION LIBRARY SPECIFICLY 8C.F.R¥§1003.1(e)(4) THE STATUTE i
ICITED BY THE B-I-A ASSTHIER DETERMINATION).
(A) THE PRIGONER BASED MAILBOX IS NOT CONTROLLED BY FEDERAL POSTAL
IEMPLOYEES, SUBMISSION AND ANSWERS ARE OCCASSIONALLY DELAYED OR LOST
IBY THE CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS EMPLOYEES. I
. ‘ [
(5) THE COMPLEXITY OF ISSUES THAT THE I.N.$ ARE ATTEMPTING TO CONFUSE
]gHE COURTS CAN NOT BE ALL BE·ADDRESSED BY THE PETITIONER ALONE,AS PRO—
I E. STATUS.
(6)PPETITIONERTHAS IN THE PAST AND CONTINUES AT PRESENT TO SEEK
A LECA]. ADVTCF AND `DITDDWQWRTTATTALI •T¤r.rtt· r>nm·rr·nTnn1::•h ·nnnr·~1:·1:~r11·;1r¤
Fekiruary 18, 2004. Auguste v. Strange; 3:O2CVI922 (RNC) L M
ReN Motion for Appointment of Counsel [Doc:. # 19] if I
Deriied without prejudice to renewal at the United States Tor
t1-I5 Second Circuit, where petitioner's habeas petition 144 isE!%%nding
uptin transfer by order of this court. [Doc. # 20] 0 Ordered.?]
T wr `
. 2* FH
& i R bert N. Chatigny .S.D.J. M" U- -
U _ I .r .r.r.-.u-A .LLLD IAAI·¤iS ACASS—TO»I¤E COURT L5 DENIED BASED UN:
n SEEECONTINUATION
. I .
Q;Q;QQQQQQQQQQ eaEELSYiii?mi?;
#-·--- .-V.---e-—-— ‘ —‘ rr rr —— -— - er -...e; » . I .....,
Q;;;QQQQQQQQQQ sa;A2?Yiii