Robinson v. Redington

E.D. Missouri

Robinson v. Redington

DecidedJanuary 12, 2023

Docket2:23-cv-00003

StatusUnknown

This text of Robinson v. Redington (Robinson v. Redington) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Robinson v. Redington, (E.D. Mo. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI NORTHERN DIVISION

WILBERT W. ROBINSON, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) No. 2:23-CV-0003 NCC ) DANIEL REDINGTON, ) ) Respondent. )

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Petitioner moves for appointment of counsel. After considering the motion and the pleadings, the motion is denied without prejudice to refiling at a later time. There is no constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel in civil cases. Nelson v. Redfield Lithograph Printing, 728 F.2d 1003, 1004 (8th Cir. 1984). In determining whether to appoint counsel, the Court considers several factors, including (1) whether the petitioner has presented non-frivolous allegations supporting his or her prayer for relief; (2) whether the petitioner will substantially benefit from the appointment of counsel; (3) whether there is a need to further investigate and present the facts related to the petitioner’s allegations; and (4) whether the factual and legal issues presented by the action are complex. See Johnson v. Williams, 788 F.2d 1319, 1322-23 (8th Cir. 1986); Nelson, 728 F.2d at 1005. Petitioner has demonstrated, at this point, that he can adequately present his claims to the Court. Additionally, neither the factual nor the legal issues in this case are complex. As such, the Court will decline to appoint counsel at this time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel [ECF No. 3] is DENIED without prejudice. Dated this 12" day of January, 2023.

HENRY EDWARD AUTREY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

_2-

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI NORTHERN DIVISION

WILBERT W. ROBINSON, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) No. 2:23-CV-0003 NCC ) DANIEL REDINGTON, ) ) Respondent. )

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Petitioner moves for appointment of counsel. After considering the motion and the pleadings, the motion is denied without prejudice to refiling at a later time. There is no constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel in civil cases. Nelson v. Redfield Lithograph Printing, 728 F.2d 1003, 1004 (8th Cir. 1984). In determining whether to appoint counsel, the Court considers several factors, including (1) whether the petitioner has presented non-frivolous allegations supporting his or her prayer for relief; (2) whether the petitioner will substantially benefit from the appointment of counsel; (3) whether there is a need to further investigate and present the facts related to the petitioner’s allegations; and (4) whether the factual and legal issues presented by the action are complex. See Johnson v. Williams, 788 F.2d 1319, 1322-23 (8th Cir. 1986); Nelson, 728 F.2d at 1005. Petitioner has demonstrated, at this point, that he can adequately present his claims to the Court. Additionally, neither the factual nor the legal issues in this case are complex. As such, the Court will decline to appoint counsel at this time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel [ECF No. 3] is DENIED without prejudice. Dated this 12" day of January, 2023.

HENRY EDWARD AUTREY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

_2-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Robinson v. Redington, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robinson-v-redington-moed-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack