194 F.2d 864 - Taylor v. Steele — 194 F.2d 864

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently December 1971

16 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

¶1Before GARDNER, Chief Judge, and SANBORN, WOODROUGH, THOMAS, JOHNSEN, RIDDICK and COLLET, Circuit Judges.

¶2PER CURIAM.

¶3An examination of the record in this case has convinced this court that this appeal prosecuted in forma pauperis is frivolous, Garcia v. Steele, 8 Cir., 193 F.2d 276, 278-279, Williams v. Steele, 8 Cir., 194 F.2d 32, arid that the appellant’s application for the appointment of counsel to represent him should have been denied.

¶4A Court of Appeals will not appoint counsel for an indigent appellant unless it appears that his appeal has merit. Gargano v. United States, 9 Cir., 140 F.2d 118; Application of Taylor, 7 Cir., 139 F.2d 1018; Kelly v. United States, 9 Cir., 135 F.2d 919; Ligare v. Plarries, 7 Cir., 128 F.2d 582. See also Kinney v. Plymouth Rock Squab Co., 236 U.S. 43, 45, 35 S.Ct. 236, 59 L.Ed. 457; Gilmore v. United States, 8 Cir., 131 F.2d 873, 874.

¶5The order of this court entered February 15, 1952, appointing counsel for the appellant is vacated and the appeal is dismissed upon the ground that it is frivolous within the meaning of Section 1915, Title 28 U.S.C.A.