Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-20-07007/USCOURTS-ca10-20-07007-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________

JAMES RICKY EZELL, III, 

 Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

DAMON HININGER, CEO of Core Civic; 

JAMES YATES, Warden, Davis 

Correctional Facility; DEPUTY WARDEN 

GENTRY, Deputy Warden; (FNU) 

PEREZ, Deputy Warden, Davis 

Correctional Facility; TERRY 

UNDERWOOD, Grievance Coordinator, 

Davis Correctional Facility; JESSICA 

PATTERSON, Law Library Supervisor, 

Davis Correctional Facility; TIFFANY 

ADE, Echo Maximum Unit Manager, 

Davis Correctional Facility; S. PFAFF; 

CARLA HOOVER, a/k/a Carl Hoover; 

SCOTT CROW, Interim Director, 

Oklahoma Department of Corrections; 

MARK KNUTSON, Designee, Oklahoma 

Department of Corrections; DAVID A. 

CINCOTTA, General Counsel, Oklahoma 

Department of Corrections; JASON 

BRYANT, Warden, Joseph Harp 

Correctional Center; R. HODGSON, 

Captain, James Crabtree Correctional 

Center; LT. AUSTIN PARKS, Lt., James 

Crabtree Correctional Center; SERGEANT 

WALKER, Correctional Officer, James 

Crabtree Correctional Center; JAMES 

NALL, Captain, James Crabtree 

Correctional Center; MS. PIRECE, 

Correctional Officer; MR. VANCE, 

Correctional Officer; MR. BULLOCK, 

Correctional Officer; MR. KEYS, 

Correctional Officer; MR. ADKINS, 

No. 20-7007

(D.C. No. 6:19-CV-00302-JHP-SPS)

(E.D. Okla.)

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

February 21, 2020

Christopher M. Wolpert

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 20-7007 Document: 010110307535 Date Filed: 02/21/2020 Page: 1
2

Correctional Officer; ANDREW SMITH, 

 Defendants – Appellees.

_________________________________

ORDER

_________________________________

Before BRISCOE, MORITZ, and CARSON, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________

Pro se plaintiff James Ezell, III, appeals the district court’s February 7, 2020 order 

denying his second motion for appointed counsel. Mr. Ezell previously appealed the 

district court’s order denying his first motion for appointed counsel, which was dismissed 

for lack of appellate jurisdiction. Ezell v. Yates, No. 19-7065 (10th Cir. Jan. 7, 2020). 

Little has changed with respect to the district court proceedings since Mr. Ezell’s first 

appeal was dismissed. The district court case remains ongoing, and no final judgment has 

been entered. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. Our precedent holding that orders 

denying appointed counsel in civil cases are not immediately appealable remans good 

law. Cotner v. Mason, 657 F.2d 1390, 1392 (10th Cir. 1981) (per curiam). Accordingly, 

and for the same reasons that Case No. 19-7065 was dismissed, this appeal is dismissed 

for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

Entered for the Court

CHRISTOPHER M. WOLPERT, Clerk

by: Lara Smith

 Counsel to the Clerk

Appellate Case: 20-7007 Document: 010110307535 Date Filed: 02/21/2020 Page: 2