United States v. Michael L. Hitchcock, United States of America v. Robert B. Greenslade

ORDER AND OPINION

ORDER

The government’s request for publication is granted. The memorandum disposition filed February 11, 1993 is redesignated a per curiam opinion.

OPINION

Hitchcock and Greenslade were separately charged with failure to file tax returns. The district court refused to appoint counsel without a showing of financial need. It also refused to prevent the prosecution from using the information they submitted to establish financial need. These interlocutory appeals followed. We dismiss the consolidated appeal for lack of jurisdiction'and decline to grant in the alternative a writ of mandamus.

I. FACTS

■ The defendants were separately charged with misdemeanor failure to-file tax returns for years in the mid-1980’s, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7203 . Both defendants obtained continuances to retain counsel but failed, to engage attorneys. Both expressed misgivings about documenting their financial need, as required by the Criminal Justice Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A, to obtain appointed counsel.

The magistrate appointed a single public defender to represent both defendants for the sole purpose of determining whether to submit the financial information or challenge its…