Palo v. Hillsborough County Department of Corrections, Superintendent
ORDER denying without prejudice 8 Motion to Appoint Counsel. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Landya B. McCafferty.(dae)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Jacob E. Palo
Civil No. 12-cv-407-JD
David Dionne, Superintendent,
Hillsborough County Department
O R D E R
Before the court is pro se plaintiff Jacob Palo’s motion
for court-appointed counsel (doc. no. 8).
detainee, proceeding in forma pauperis.
Palo is a pretrial
Palo seeks the
appointment of counsel because he is indigent and because he
does not have a full understanding of the law.
There is no federal constitutional right to counsel in a
The court generally has discretion to deny an
appointment, unless the indigent litigant shows that his case
presents exceptional circumstances, such that fundamental
unfairness, impinging upon the right to due process, is likely
to result if counsel is not appointed.
949 F.2d 15, 23 (1st Cir. 1991).
See DesRosiers v. Moran,
Here, Palo has demonstrated
that he can draft cogent arguments and claims.
detention, lack of a full understanding of the law, and
inability to afford counsel do not, at this time, threaten to
result in fundamental unfairness.
Accordingly, the motion to
appoint counsel (doc. no. 8) is denied without prejudice to
refiling if exceptional circumstances should arise warranting an
United States Magistrate Judge
April 22, 2013
Jacob E. Palo, pro se