Opinion ID: 4564364
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Motion for Appointment of Counsel

Text: Mr. Crosby also asserts on appeal that the district court erred by failing to give or send him an order on his motion for appointment of counsel. To the extent Mr. Crosby objects to the district court’s ruling, the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to consider the motion for being illegible. See Hurt v. United States, 705 F. App’x 778 (10th Cir. 2017) (dismissing illegible appeal as frivolous). To the extent Mr. Crosby objects to the district court’s alleged failure to communicate its order to Mr. Crosby, a notice of the order was, in fact, mailed to Mr. Crosby at the prison where he is incarcerated. ROA at 106.