Filed: Mar. 05, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 05, 2012
Summary: ORDER JAMES S. MOODY, Jr., District Judge. THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Plaintiff Billy G. Mayberry's Motion for Reconsideration of Plaintiff's Second Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Dkt. 70) and Defendants' Response in opposition (Dkt. 73). The Court, having reviewed the motion, response, and being otherwise advised of the premises, concludes that the motion should be denied. Plaintiff Mayberry, a pro se inmate, filed this excessive force action against Defendants on August 2
Summary: ORDER JAMES S. MOODY, Jr., District Judge. THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Plaintiff Billy G. Mayberry's Motion for Reconsideration of Plaintiff's Second Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Dkt. 70) and Defendants' Response in opposition (Dkt. 73). The Court, having reviewed the motion, response, and being otherwise advised of the premises, concludes that the motion should be denied. Plaintiff Mayberry, a pro se inmate, filed this excessive force action against Defendants on August 23..
More
ORDER
JAMES S. MOODY, Jr., District Judge.
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Plaintiff Billy G. Mayberry's Motion for Reconsideration of Plaintiff's Second Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Dkt. 70) and Defendants' Response in opposition (Dkt. 73). The Court, having reviewed the motion, response, and being otherwise advised of the premises, concludes that the motion should be denied.
Plaintiff Mayberry, a pro se inmate, filed this excessive force action against Defendants on August 23, 2010. Mayberry moved for the appointment of counsel on two prior occasions; United States Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson denied both motions based, largely, on long-standing federal law that holds that a party does not have a constitutional right for the appointment of counsel in a civil case (Dkts. 57 & 67). Judge Wilson noted that such an appointment is a privilege, and one that is justified under only exceptional circumstances, none of which are present in the instant case.
The Court agrees that the circumstances of this case do not justify the appointment of counsel. As noted by Judge Wilson, Mayberry's claim of excessive force is "not so complex as to warrant the appointment of counsel." (Dkt. 57).
It is therefore ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff Bill G. Mayberry's Motion for Reconsideration of Plaintiff's Second Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Dkt. 70) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED.
