FREEMAN v. STATE OF MAINE
ORDER overruling 7 Objection to Order on Motion to Appoint Counsel By JUDGE JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR. (sfw)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
ANDREW J. FREEMAN,
STATE OF MAINE,
ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTION
On November 14, 2016, Andrew J. Freeman filed a motion to appoint counsel
in this case. Mot. to Appoint Counsel (ECF No. 5). On November 16, 2016, the
Magistrate Judge denied his motion. Order on Pet’r’s Mot. for Appointed  Counsel
(ECF No. 6). On November 30, 2016, Mr. Freeman moved for reconsideration of the
denial and objected to the order. Obj. to Order on Mot. to Appoint Counsel (ECF No.
7); Mot. for Recons. re Order on Mot. to Appoint Counsel (ECF No. 8). This Court
awaited the Magistrate Judge’s ruling on the motion for reconsideration before acting
on the objection. On December 20, 2016, the Magistrate Judge denied Mr. Freeman’s
motion for reconsideration. Order on Mot. for Recons. (ECF No. 9). Any objections to
the order on the motion for reconsideration were due by January 9, 2017. None has
As the Magistrate Judge’s orders address a non-dispositive matter, the
standard by which this Court must evaluate the Magistrate Judge’s ruling is whether
it is “clearly erroneous or is contrary to law.” FED. R. CIV. P. 72(a); 28 U.S.C. §
The Court reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s original order dated
November 16, 2016 and, even though the Magistrate Judge’s order on the motion for
reconsideration dated December 20, 2016 is not technically before the Court, the
Court reviewed that order as well. Applying the legal standards, the Court has
concluded that neither order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.
Accordingly, the Court OVERRULES Andrew J. Freeman’s Objection to Order
on Motion to Appoint Counsel (ECF No. 7) and AFFIRMS the Magistrate Judge’s
Order on Petitioner’s Motion for Appointed  Counsel (ECF No. 6).
/s/ John A. Woodcock, Jr.
JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 11th day of January, 2017
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?