Davis v. Core Civic, Inc. et al
Filing
167
OPINION AND ORDER by District Judge James H. Payne : Denying 110 136 plaintiff's second and third Motion for Appointment of Counsel. (acg, Deputy Clerk)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
EZEKIEL DAVIS,
Plaintiff,
v.
CORE CIVIC, INC., et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. CIV 17-293-JHP-SPS
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING
SECOND AND THIRD MOTIONS FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
Plaintiff has filed second and third motions for appointment of counsel (Dkts. 110,
136). He alleges in part that his case is complex, and he needs assistance to prevent the
defendants from presenting false facts and committing fraud.
There is no constitutional right to appointment of counsel in a civil case. Durre v.
Dempsey, 869 F.2d 543, 547 (10th Cir. 1989); Carper v. DeLand, 54 F.3d 613, 616 (10th Cir.
1995). The decision whether to appoint counsel in a civil matter lies within the discretion
of the district court. Williams v. Meese, 926 F.2d 994, 996 (10th Cir. 1991). “The burden
is on the applicant to convince the court that there is sufficient merit to his claim to warrant
the appointment of counsel.” Steffey v. Orman, 461 F.3d 1218, 1223 (10th Cir. 2006)
(quoting Hill v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 393 F.3d 1111, 1115 (10th Cir. 2004)). It is not
enough “that having counsel appointed would [assist the prisoner] in presenting his strongest
possible case, [as] the same could be said in any case.” Steffey, 461 F.3d at 1223 (quoting
Rucks v. Boergermann, 57 F.3d 978, 979 (10th Cir. 1995)).
The Court again 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
v. Weinberg, 753 F.2d 836, 838 (10th Cir. 1985) (citing Maclin v. Freake, 650 F.2d 885, 88788 (7th Cir. 1981)). The Court concludes the issues are not complex, and Plaintiff appears
capable of adequately presenting facts and arguments.
ACCORDINGLY, Plaintiff’s second and third motions for appointment of counsel
(Dkts. 110 and 136) are DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 12th day of February, 2019.
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?