Maynard v. Chrisman

Filing 12

OPINION AND ORDER by Judge Ronald A. White : Denying 5 Motion for Appointment of Counsel. (acg, Deputy Clerk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT couRT Fo&ILE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

D

MAR 2 Gzon

LARRY DON WESLEY MAYNARD,

Petitioner,

v.
JERRY CHRISMAN,
Interim Warden,

Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

.

,. , B GUTHRIE

WlLLklAlu'ils . District court
Cler .

· ·

By~·

No. CIV 13-027-RAW-KEW

OPINION AND ORDER
DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

Petitioner has filed a motion requesting the court to appoint counsel. He bears the
burden of convincing the court that his claim has sufficient merit to warrant appointment of
counsel. McCarthy v. Weinberg, 753 F.2d 836, 838 (lOth Cir. 1985) (citing United States
v. Masters, 484 F.2d 1251, 1253 (lOth Cir. 1973)). Petitioner alleges he has had a long
history of mental illness since he was a teenager. In 1987 he was determined to be mentally
ill by the Social Security Administration, and in 2002, the United States District Court for
the Northern District of Oklahoma found he was incompetent at that time. All of his
supporting exhibits are more than ten years old.
The court has carefully reviewed the merits of petitioner's claim, the nature of factual
issues raised in his allegations, and his ability to investigate crucial facts. McCarthy, 753
F.2d at 838 (citing Maclin v. Freake, 650 F.2d 885, 887-88 (7th Cir. 1981)). After
considering petitioner's ability to present his claims and the complexity of the legal issues
raised by the claims, the court finds that appointment of counsel is not warranted. See
Williams v. Meese, 926 F.2d 994, 996 (lOth Cir. 1991); See also Rucks v. Boergermann, 57
F.3d 978, 979 (lOth Cir. 1995).
ACCORDINGLY, petitioner's motion [Docket No. 5] is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED this

2~,11-- day ofMarch 2013.

RONALD A. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE