Order Form (01/2005)

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois

Name of Assigned Judge

or Magistrate Judge Samuel Der-Yeghiayan Sitting Judge if Otherthan Assigned Judge

CASE NUMBER 12 C 1454 DATE 12/14/2012

CASE

TITLE

Oliver Jackson (R-16066) vs. Marcus Hardy 

DOCKET ENTRY TEXT

For the reasons stated below, Petitioner’s motion to reconsider [33] is denied. However, the court will

extend Petitioner’s deadline for responding to the currently pending motion to dismiss filed by Respondent. 

Petitioner is given until January 28, 2013 to file his response to Respondent’s motion to dismiss. Respondent

is given until February 11, 2013 to file his reply in support of his motion to dismiss. Status hearing is reset to

May 23, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. The previously set status date of April 24, 2013 is stricken. 

O[ For further details see text below.] Docketing to mail notices.

STATEMENT

This matter is before the court on Petitioner Oliver Jackson’s (Jackson) motion to reconsider the

court’s denial of his previous motion for an appointment of counsel. On July 23, 2012, the court denied

Jackson’s motion for appointment of counsel after finding that, based upon the record before the court,

Jackson was competent to present his case without the assistance of appointed counsel. In his motion to

reconsider, Jackson points to the medical records that he supplied to the court, and Jackson has also informed

the court that the prison law clerk who had been assisting him is no longer available. The court notes that,

according to the medical records submitted by Jackson, the “retardation” Jackson refers to in his motion

relates to psychomotor retardation, which is a slowing down of thoughts and physical movements, as opposed

to retardation relating to having a low IQ. It also appears from the medical records that Jackson’s

psychomotor level was back to normal by 2002 or 2003. In addition, the latest medical reports that Jackson

has submitted to the court are from several years ago. 

Jackson’s case does not appear overly complex or difficult, factually or legally. The court has again

considered the entire record in this case at this juncture, as it reflects on Jackson’s ability to coherently

present his case as a layperson and his ability to perform the tasks that normally attend litigation. Pruitt v.

12C1454 Oliver Jackson (R-16066) vs. Marcus Hardy Page 1 of 2
STATEMENT

Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654, 661 (7th Cir. 2007). The court concludes that, based upon the record, Jackson is

competent to present his case without the assistance of appointed counsel. Therefore, the court finds that an

appointment of counsel is not warranted at this juncture, and the court denies Jackson’s motion to reconsider. 

However, the court will extend Jackson’s deadline for responding to the currently pending motion to dismiss

filed by Respondent. Jackson is given until January 28, 2013 to file his response to Respondent’s motion to

dismiss. Respondent is given until February 11, 2013 to file his reply in support of his motion to dismiss. 

Status hearing is reset to May 23, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. The previously set status date of April 24, 2013 is

stricken. 

12C1454 Oliver Jackson (R-16066) vs. Marcus Hardy Page 2 of 2