Martin v. Lampshire et al
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER denying 23 Motion to Appoint Counsel; denying 27 Motion to Appoint Counsel. The Clerk's office shall accept no more motions for appointed counsel from Plaintiff. Signed by Judge Tena Campbell on 7/5/12 (alt)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
) ORDER DENYING MOTION &
) MEMORANDUM DECISION
) Case No. 2:11-CV-335 TC
) District Judge Tena Campbell
OFFICER JONATHON LAMPSHIRE,
TRAVIS BEN MARTIN,
Plaintiff, Travis Ben Martin, filed a pro se prisoner civil
Plaintiff now moves a second and third time
for appointed counsel.
The Court reiterates that Plaintiff has no constitutional
right to counsel.2
However, the Court may in its discretion
appoint counsel for indigent inmates.3
"The burden is upon the
applicant to convince the court that there is sufficient merit to
his claim to warrant the appointment of counsel."4
When deciding whether to appoint counsel, the district court
should consider a variety of factors, "including 'the merits of
the litigant's claims, the nature of the factual issues raised in
the claims, the litigant's ability to present his claims, and the
See 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 (2012).
See Carper v. Deland, 54 F.3d 613, 616 (10th Cir. 1995); Bee v. Utah
State Prison, 823 F.2d 397, 399 (10th Cir. 1987).
See 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915(e)(1) (2012); Carper, 54 F.3d at 617; Williams
v. Meese, 926 F.2d 994, 996 (10th Cir. 1991).
McCarthy v. Weinberg, 753 F.2d 836, 838 (10th Cir. 1985).
complexity of the legal issues raised by the claims.'"5
Considering the above factors, the Court again concludes here
that, at this time, Plaintiff's claims may not be colorable, the
issues in this case are not complex, and Plaintiff is not at this
time too incapacitated or unable to adequately function in
pursuing this matter.
Thus, the Court denies for now Plaintiff's
motions for appointed counsel.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motions for appointed
counsel are DENIED6; however, if, after the case develops
further, it appears that counsel may be needed or of specific
help, the Court will ask an attorney to appear pro bono on
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk's office shall accept
no more motions for appointed counsel from Plaintiff.
DATED this 5th day of July, 2012.
BY THE COURT:
JUDGE TENA CAMPBELL
United States District Court
Rucks v. Boergermann, 57 F.3d 978, 979 (10th Cir. 1995) (quoting
Williams, 926 F.2d at 996); accord McCarthy, 753 F.2d at 838-39.
(See Docket Entry #s 23 & 27.)
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?