Lisasuain v. Hillsborough County Department of Corrections

Filing 38

ORDER denying without prejudice 32 Motion to Appoint Counsel. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Landya B. McCafferty.(mm)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Armando Lisasuain v. Civil No. 12-cv-224-PB Justin Goulding O R D E R Before the court is pro se plaintiff Armando Lisasuain’s motion for court-appointed counsel (doc. no. 32). objects (doc. no. 33). Defendant Lisasuain seeks the appointment of counsel because, he asserts, he was unable to effectively conduct his own legal research and do his legal work at the Hillsborough County Department of Corrections (“HCDC”), and because HCDC personnel refused to provide him with free postage for letters he wrote seeking representation from attorneys. Approximately one week after filing this motion, Lisasuain was transferred to the New Hampshire State Prison (“NHSP”). There is no federal constitutional right to counsel in a civil case. 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, Lisasuain has not demonstrated any such extraordinary circumstances. Further, Lisasuain is no longer subject to the policies and conditions at the HCDC, and has not complained that he is unable access the legal resources he needs at the NHSP. Accordingly, the motion to appoint counsel (doc. no. 32) is denied without prejudice to refiling if exceptional circumstances should arise warranting such an appointment. __________________________ Landya McCafferty United States Magistrate Judge May 8, 2013 cc: Armando Lisasuain, pro se John Curran, Esq. LBM:jba 2

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?