Crafton v. Earl et al

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 4 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Chief Judge Thomas B. Russell on 1/13/2009. cc: Plaintiff, pro se (LMW)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT BOWLING GREEN JUNIOR RAY CRAFTON v. JOSH EARL et al.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff, Junior Ray Crafton, has filed a pro se, in forma pauperis complaint (DN 1). He has also filed a Motion for Appointment of Counsel (DN 4), in which he asks this Court to appoint counsel for him because he cannot afford an attorney. In a civil case, appointment of counsel is not a constitutional right. Lavado v. Keohane, 992 F.2d 601, 605 (6th Cir. 1993). Title 28, United States Code, section 1915(e)(1) indicates that courtenlisted assistance of counsel is not mandatory, but merely a matter of discretion. See Martin v. Harvey, 14 F. App'x. 307, 310 (6th Cir. 2001). Furthermore, appointment of counsel is justified only in exceptional circumstances. Lavado, 992 F.2d at 606. The relevant factors that must be looked at in determining if exceptional circumstances exist are the complexity of the issues involved and the ability of the plaintiff to represent himself. Id. The Court finds that the complexity of the legal issues in this case does not necessitate the appointment of counsel. Further, based on the pleadings filed thus far, it appears that Plaintiff is familiar with the workings of the legal system and is able to sufficiently represent himself at this time. Plaintiff has not set forth any exceptional circumstances warranting appointment of counsel at this time.

PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:08-CV-123-R DEFENDANTS

Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that the motion for appointment of counsel (DN 4) is DENIED. Date:
January 13, 2009

cc:

Plaintiff, pro se Defendants

4413.009