Johnson v. Marlar et al
OPINION AND ORDER by District Judge James H. Payne : Denying 3 plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel. (acg, Deputy Clerk)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
DEXTER LEEMON JOHNSON,
DR. JOHN MARLAR and
No. CIV 16-440-JHP-SPS
OPINION AND ORDER
DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
Plaintiff 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 such
appointment. McCarthy v. Weinberg, 753 F.2d 836, 838 (10th Cir. 1985) (citing United
States v. Masters, 484 F.2d 1251, 1253 (10th Cir. 1973)). The court has carefully reviewed
the merits of Plaintiff’s claims, 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 Plaintiff’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 (10th Cir. 1991); see
also Rucks v. Boergermann, 57 F.3d 978, 979 (10th Cir. 1995).
ACCORDINGLY, Plaintiff’s motion (Dkt. 3) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 17th day of October 2016.
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?