Johnson v. Weaver

Fifth Circuit

Johnson v. Weaver

81 F. App'x 841

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedDecember 4, 2003

Docket03-30744

StatusUnpublished

This text of 81 F. App'x 841 (Johnson v. Weaver) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Johnson v. Weaver, 81 F. App'x 841 (5th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM. *

Anthony Morris Johnson, Louisiana prisoner #88158-288425, appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for appointment of counsel in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging excessive force. Johnson contends that he is a layman of law and that the ends of justice require counsel be appointed to represent him.

This is a relatively straight-forward, fact-intensive case that does not require Johnson to demonstrate legal skills or training to inform the court adequately of his allegations. Johnson’s claims are based on his own direct experiences and are not likely to require extensive investigation. Johnson has not shown exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of counsel. See Feist v. Jefferson County Comm’rs Court, 778 F.2d 250, 253 (5th Cir.1985). Therefore, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for the appointment of counsel.

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM. *

Anthony Morris Johnson, Louisiana prisoner #88158-288425, appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for appointment of counsel in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging excessive force. Johnson contends that he is a layman of law and that the ends of justice require counsel be appointed to represent him.

This is a relatively straight-forward, fact-intensive case that does not require Johnson to demonstrate legal skills or training to inform the court adequately of his allegations. Johnson’s claims are based on his own direct experiences and are not likely to require extensive investigation. Johnson has not shown exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of counsel. See Feist v. Jefferson County Comm’rs Court, 778 F.2d 250, 253 (5th Cir.1985). Therefore, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for the appointment of counsel.

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

81 F. App'x 841, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-weaver-ca5-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack