Lopez v. FBI et al, No. 1:2024cv00028 - Document 8 (D. Utah 2024)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER denying 6 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg on 2/29/2024. (alf)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Lopez v. FBI et al Doc. 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH NORTHERN DIVISION JERRY ERNEST LOPEZ, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL (DOC. NO. 6) Plaintiff, v. F.B.I. OF SALT LAKE CITY; and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Case No. 1:24-cv-00028 Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg Defendants. Plaintiff Jerry Ernest Lopez filed this action without an attorney and in forma pauperis (without paying the filing fee). 1 Mr. Lopez now moves for appointment of counsel. 2 Because Mr. Lopez does not provide a reason for his request, the motion is denied without prejudice. While defendants in criminal cases have a constitutional right to representation by an attorney, 3 “[t]here is no constitutional right to appointed counsel in a civil case.” 4 Appointment of counsel in civil cases is left to the court’s discretion. 5 Indigent parties in civil cases may apply for the appointment of counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), which allows a court to “request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel.” The applicant has the 1 (See Order Granting Mot. to Proceed in Forma Pauperis, Doc. No. 4; Compl., Doc. No. 5.) 2 (Mot. for Appointment of Counsel, Doc. No. 6.) 3 See U.S. Const. amend. VI; Fed. R. Crim. P. 44. 4 Durre v. Dempsey, 869 F.2d 543, 547 (10th Cir. 1989). 5 Shabazz v. Askins, 14 F.3d 533, 535 (10th Cir. 1994). 1 Dockets.Justia.com burden to convince the court his/her/their claim has enough merit to warrant appointment of counsel. 6 When deciding whether to appoint counsel, the court considers a variety of factors, including “the merits of the litigant’s claims, the nature of the factual issues raised in the claims, the litigant’s ability to present [the] claims, and the complexity of the legal issues raised by the claims.” 7 Mr. Lopez asks the court to appoint counsel but states no reason or basis for the request, other than that he has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. As outlined above, this is insufficient to warrant appointment of counsel in a civil case. Accordingly, the court DENIES Mr. Lopez’s motion for appointment of counsel 8 without prejudice. 9 DATED this 29th day of February, 2024. BY THE COURT: _____________________________ Daphne A. Oberg United States Magistrate Judge 6 McCarthy v. Weinberg, 753 F.2d 836, 838 (10th Cir. 1985). 7 Rucks v. Boergermann, 57 F.3d 978, 979 (10th Cir. 1995) (internal quotation marks omitted). 8 (Doc. No. 6.) 9 Because the motion is denied without prejudice, Mr. Lopez may file a new motion explaining why, under the factors outlined above, his case warrants the appointment of counsel. 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
