Timothy Nelson v. Dorn Shuffman Diane McFarland Karen Adams Alan Blake Martha Bellew-Smith Linda Meade
Opinions
Timothy Nelson appeals the district court’s1 denial of his motion for appointment of counsel. The district court’s denial of counsel is affirmed at this time, but the denial is without prejudice to Timothy Nelson’s right to renew his request for counsel as the case progresses. In any future orders which may deny requests for counsel, the district court is directed to state in more detail its reasons for doing so. See Slaughter v. City of Maplewood, 731 F.2d 587, 589 (8th Cir.1984) (discussing the need for the record to reveal “whether the district court exercised a reasoned and well-informed discretion, so as to permit ... review for abuse of discretion”).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
476 F.3d 635 (Timothy Nelson v. Dorn Shuffman Diane McFarland Karen Adams Alan Blake Martha Bellew-Smith Linda Meade) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.