Collins (ID 70273) v. Wichita, Kansas, City of

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

ROGER ALLEN COLLINS,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 22-3135-SAC

CITY OF WICHITA, et al.,

Defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel. There is no constitutional right to the appointment of counsel in a civil matter. Carper v. Deland, 54 F.3d 613, 616 (10th Cir. 1995); Durre v. Dempsey, 869 F.2d 543, 547 (10th Cir. 1989). Rather, the decision whether to appoint counsel in a civil action lies in the discretion of the district court. Williams v. Meese, 926 F.2d 994, 996 (10th Cir. 1991). The party seeking the appointment of counsel has the burden to convince the court that the claims presented have sufficient merit to warrant the appointment of counsel. Steffey v. Orman, 461 F.3d 1218, 1223 (10th Cir. 2016)(citing Hill v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 393 F.3d 1111, 1115 (10th Cir. 2004)). It is not enough “that having counsel appointed would have assisted [the movant] in presenting his strongest possible case, [as] the same could be said in any case.” Steffey, 461 F.3d at 1223 (citing Rucks v. Boergermann, 57 F.3d 978, 979 (10th Cir. 1995)). The Court should consider “the merits of the prisoner’s claims, the nature and complexity of the factual and legal issues, and the prisoner’s ability to investigate The court has reviewed the record and finds no ground to appoint counsel in this matter. On July 15, 2022, the court entered an order that directs plaintiff to show cause why this matter should not be dismissed. Because the court has not identified issues of considerable complexity, it declines to appoint counsel in this matter.1 IT IS, THEREFORE, BY THE COURT ORDERED plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel (Doc. 10) is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: This 20th day of July, 2022, at Topeka, Kansas.

S/ Sam A. Crow SAM A. CROW U.S. Senior District Judge