Opinion
CAUSE NO. 3:08-CV-282 PS.
January 9, 2009
OPINION AND ORDER
Tommy Lampley, a pro se prisoner, filed a motion asking the Court to appoint counsel to represent him. However,
When confronted with a request under § 1915(e)(1) for pro bono counsel, the district court is to make the following inquiries: (1) has the indigent plaintiff made a reasonable attempt to obtain counsel or been effectively precluded from doing so; and if so, (2) given the difficulty of the case, does the plaintiff appear competent to litigate it himself?Pruitt v. Mote, 5003 F. 3D 647, 654 (7th Cir. 2007) ( en banc).
To show he has tried to obtain counsel, Lampley attached twelve letters he received from attorneys he claims to have contacted about representing him in this case. However, because all of the letters predate this Court's screening order, it would have been difficult for an attorney to determine whether Lampley even stated a claim. Consequently, Lampley's effort to secure counsel on his own, as this record shows, was not a reasonable attempt. "If . . . the indigent has made no reasonable attempts to secure counsel . . ., the court should deny any § 1915(d) motions outright." Jackson v. County of McLean, 953 F.2d 1070, 1073 (7th Cir. 1992).
Therefore, the Court:
(1) DENIES the motion for appointment of counsel [Doc. No. 40]; and
(2) DIRECTS the Clerk to send Tommy Lampley twelve (12) copies of this Court's screening order [Doc. No. 23] so that he can make a reasonable attempt to obtain counsel on his own.
SO ORDERED.