Aubut v. State of Maine, Misc. No. 412.
| Decision Date | 23 September 1970 |
| Docket Number | Misc. No. 412. |
| Parties | Lucien M. AUBUT, Petitioner, v. STATE OF MAINE et al., Respondents. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit |
Lucien M. Aubut, pro se.
Before ALDRICH, Chief Judge, McENTEE and COFFIN, Circuit Judges.
Petitioner, having been convicted in the state court of uttering a forged instrument, and having unsuccessfully appealed, State v. Aubut, Me., 1970, 261 A.2d 48, sought habeas corpus relief in the district court. His petition was dismissed without hearing. A certificate of probable cause for appeal having been denied by that court, he appropriately renews the request here. Local Rule 11. Petitioner also seeks the appointment of counsel, and other preliminary relief.
We do not accept "notice" pleading in habeas corpus proceedings. Were the rule otherwise, every state prisoner could obtain a hearing by filing a complaint composed, as is the present one, of generalizations and conclusions. The petition should set out substantive facts that will enable the court to see a real possibility of constitutional error. Habeas corpus is not a general form of relief for those who seek to explore their case in search of its existence.
Nor, alternatively, will we appoint counsel to make such a search for an indigent prisoner who is unable to file a complaint that shows a reasonable possibility of error. Joyce v. United States, 1 Cir., 1964, 327 F.2d 531; Anderson v. Heinze, 9 Cir., 1958, 258 F.2d 479, cert. denied 358 U.S. 889, 79 S.Ct. 131, 3 L.Ed.2d 116; cf. Johnson v. Avery, 1969, 393 U.S. 483, 488, 89 S.Ct. 747, 21 L.Ed.2d 718. Possibly this is a hardship in rare cases, but, judicially, we regard the "cure" to be excessive. All discontented prisoners ignorant of the presence of constitutional error, but ever hopeful, would make such a request. Inadequately paid counsel, and the courts, would be grossly burdened in the interest of providing representation at proceedings in which the possibility of finding constitutional error is, in our experience, highly remote. If Congress wishes to furnish counsel to state prisoners to enable them to discover if they have been deprived of constitutional rights, that is a legislative matter. We do not consider it a judicial obligation when a prisoner does nothing more than make unsupported conclusory allegations.
We will not appoint counsel for petitioner, but we will look beyond his inadequate petition to his accompanying detailed memorandum of fact and law. Accepting those factual allegations as true for present purposes, petitioner asserts error in a series of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Carballo v. Barr, Case No.: 2:20-cv-01315-APG-BNW
...for the petition is expected to state facts that point to a ‘real possibility of constitutional error.’ " (quoting Aubut v. State of Maine , 431 F.2d 688, 689 (1st Cir. 1970) )).The general nature of the COVID-19 pandemic, as reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),......
-
Hernandez v. Cooper, 97-C-1296.
...and conclusions," are insufficient, and "notice" pleading is not accepted in habeas corpus proceedings. Aubut v. State of Maine, 431 F.2d 688, 689 (1st Cir.1970); see O'Bremski v. Maass, 915 F.2d 418, 420 (9th Cir.1990) ("notice" pleading insufficient); Cunningham v. Estelle, 536 F.2d 82, 8......
-
Rivera v. Lewis
...habeas relief[.]"). Respondent argues that Petitioner's "claim is too vague to warrant relief." ECF No. 19 at 53 (citing Aubut v. Maine, 431 F.2d 688, 689 (1st Cir.1970) ("The petition should set out substantive facts that will enable the court to see a real possibility of constitutional er......
-
Nolan v. Palmer
...possibility of constitutional error. Advisory Committee Note to Rule 4, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, citing Aubut v. State of Maine, 431 F.2d 688, 689 (1st. Cir. 1970), cited in Blackledge v. Allison, 431 U.S. 63, 75 n. 7 (1977). In fact, a petition for writ of habeas corpus may be d......