Fazel v. Boyd, M.D et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DONALD 0.FAZEL, 4:21-CV-04219-LLP
Plaintiff,
vs.
DR. BOYD,M.D.; CARLA STEPPAT,
INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY;
SASHA LABRENZ;INDIVIDUAL AND
OFFICIAL CAPACITY; WARDEN K.
BENNETT,INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITY,
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S
EMERGENCY MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF AS MOOT AND DENYING
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
Defendants.
Plaintiff, Donald 0. Fazel, an inmate at the Yankton Federal Prison Camp,filed a pro se
lawsuit under 28 § U.S.C. § 1331; v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents,403 U.S.
388(1971), and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Doc. 1. This Court screened FazeTs complaint under 28
U.S.C. § 1915A,dismissing the complaint in part and directing service on defendants in part.
Doc. 17. Specifically, Fazel's Eighth Amendment Bivens claim for deliberate indifference to
serious medical needs against Steppat and Labrenz in their individual capacities and his Fifth
Amendment equal protection Bivens claim against Steppat in her individual capacity survived §
1915A screening, and FazeFs remaining claims were dismissed under 28 U.S.C. §§
1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and 1915A(bXl)- Id. at 25. Fazel has now filed an emergency motion for
injunctive relief in which he also moves for the appointment of coxmsel. Doc. 15.
1. Emergency Motion for Injunctive Relief
Case 4:21-cv-04219-LLP Document 29 Filed 02/15/23 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>

Fazel alleges that defendants have continued to harass him and retaliate against him. Id.
at 1-2. He alleges that he has been Incarcerated past his home confinement date in retaliation for
filing this lawsuit. Id. at 1. He also alleges that defendants "have engaged and continue to engage
in over 7 isolated acts of malicious and vindictive punishment and retaliation towards[him]" and
that this has caused "extreme, emotional, physchological [sic] and physical duress and
depression, resulting in diminishing physical health, sleep disorder, eating disorder, and mental
and physical suffering." Id. at 1-2. Fazel requests an injunction prohibiting defendants from "any
further contact, harrasment [sic],[and] relaliation[.]" Id. at 1. He also requests his immediate
release. Id.
Fazel was released to home confinement on or around May 3,2022. Doc. 18 at 1."[A]
prisoner's claim for injunctive reliefto improve prison conditions is moot if he or she is no
longer subject to those conditions." Martin v. Sargent, 780 F.2d 1334, 1337(8th Cir. 1985).
Fazel is no longer incarcerated at the Yankton Federal Prison Camp and is no longer subject to
the conditions for which he seeks injunctive relief. Thus, his emergency motion for injunctive
relief, Doc. 15, is denied as moot.
II. Motion to Appoint Counsel
In his emergency motion for injimctive relief, Fazel asks the Coiut"to provide and
appoint [cjounsel as soon as possible[.]" Doc. 15 at 2. This Court construes FazeTs request as a
motion to appoint counsel. See id. "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, the 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, Fazel's claims do not
Case 4:21-cv-04219-LLP Document 29 Filed 02/15/23 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>

appear to be too complex, and Fazel is able to investigate the facts and present his claims
adequately. The Court remains open to the possibility of appointing counsel ifthis case proceeds
beyond the motion stage. It is one thing to well represent one's position on paper to the court,
and it is yet another to be able to adequately try a case to ajury. Thus,this Court denies FazeTs
motion to appoint counsel.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED:
1. That Fazel's emergency motion for injunctive relief, Doc. 15, is denied as moot.
2. That Fazel's motion for appointment of counsel. Doc. 15,isdenied.
Dated this 15th day ofFebruary, 2023.
BY THE COURT:
awrence L. Piersol
ATTEST: United States District Judge
MATTHEW W.THELEN,CLERK
Case 4:21-cv-04219-LLP Document 29 Filed 02/15/23 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>