UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
RANDALL WILLIAM CHURCH CORNETT, 4:25-CV-04162-ECS
Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
VS. MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL
DONNA (MENTAL HEALTH), Mental Health
Counselor at Minnehaha County Jail, Individual
and Official Capacity; ANTHONY HELLAND,
Director of Operations at Minnehaha County
Jail, Individual and Official Capacity;
Defendants.
Plaintiff, Randall William Church Cornett, an inmate at the Minnehaha County Jail, filed
this pro se civil rights lawsuit. Doc. 1. This Court screened Cornett’s Complaint, dismissing it
in part and directing service on the remaining Defendants. Doc. 7. He now moves for the
appointment of counsel. Doc. 15. He requests appointment of counsel because he does not have
any legal experience, has “no idea how to navigate this legal issue any longer,” and feels “forced
to abandon all accusations due to [his] complete and total lack of comprehension.” Id. But “[a]
pro se litigant has no statutory or constitutional right to have counsel appointed in a civil case.”
Stevens v. Redwing, 146 F.3d 538, 546 (8th Cir. 1998). In determining whether to appoint
counsel to a pro se litigant, this Court considers the complexity of the case, the ability of the
litigant to investigate the facts, the existence of conflicting testimony, and the litigant’s ability to
present his claims. Id. At this time, Cornett’s claims are not complex, and he has been able to
investigate the facts and present his claims adequately. This Court has entered a Scheduling
Order, which lays out any pending deadlines in this case. Doc. 13. With this Court’s Scheduling
Order, a copy of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure related to discovery was provided to the
parties as was a copy of this Court’s Civil Local Rules. Docs. 13, 13-1. Thus, this Court
believes that Cornett is capable of pursuing his claims pro se at this phase of litigation.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that Cornett’s motion to appoint counsel, Doc. 15, is denied.
DATED this So day of August, 2026.
BY THE COURT:
RIC C. SCHULTE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
=
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.