Freeman v. Condon
Opinion
Roderick Keith Freeman seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying Freeman’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss Freeman’s appeal substantially on the reasoning of the district court. * See Freeman v. Condon, CA-00-536-7 (D.S.C. Mar. 28, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.
To the extent Freeman contends he was denied effective assistance of counsel at his post-conviction relief hearing, we note that defendants are not constitutionally entitled to counsel at such hearings, a necessary prerequisite to a constitutional ineffective assistance of counsel claim. See Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 752, 111 S.Ct. 2546, 115 L.Ed.2d 640 (1991).
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Roderick Keith FREEMAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Charles Molony CONDON, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondent-Appellee
- Status
- Unpublished