with discovery. The determination of whether counsel should be appointed is not necessarily dependent upon whether a petitioner raises issues in a petition which, if true, would entitle the petitioner to relief. Appellant's petition arose out of a guilty plea with a potentially complex issue surrounding the advice of court-appointed counsel regarding appellant's ability to withdraw his guilty plea post- sentencing. Appellant is serving a significant sentence. In addition, appellant moved for the appointment of counsel and claimed that he was indigent. The failure to appoint post-conviction counsel prevented a meaningful litigation of the petition. Thus, we reverse the district court's denial of appellant's petition and remand this matter for the appointment of counsel to assist appellant in the post-conviction proceedings. Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of the district court REVERSED AND REMAND this matter to the district court for proceedings consistent with this order. 2 Pickering Parraguirre 6:5,24il, J. Saitta 2We have considered all proper person documents filed or received in this matter. We conclude that appellant is only entitled to the relief described herein. SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A cc: Hon. Kathleen E. Delaney, District Judge Paul Santiago Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) I 9474 Att.