Resendez v. Smith

Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing defendant's habeas petition alleging that trial court denied defendant his right to counsel by denying his motion for appointment of counsel with respect to his pending motion under Indiana law to correct his sentence on his robbery conviction that had been filed after trial court had revoked his probation on said conviction. Defendant had no constitutional right to appointment of counsel where defendant's motion to correct sentence was essentially collateral attack on his sentence since: (1) alleged sentencing error was not clear from face of trial court's original judgment; and (2) resolution of defendant's alleged error required consideration of proceedings that occurred after entry of original judgment.