United States District Court, D. Maine
ANDREW J. FREEMAN, Petitioner,
STATE OF MAINE, Respondent.
ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTION
A. WOODCOCK, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
November 14, 2016, Andrew J. Freeman filed a motion to
appoint counsel in this case. Mot. to Appoint
Counsel (ECF No. 5). On November 16, 2016, the
Magistrate Judge denied his motion. Order on
Pet'r's Mot. for Appointed  Counsel (ECF No.
6). On November 30, 2016, Mr. Freeman moved for
reconsideration of the denial and objected to the order.
Obj. to Order on Mot. to Appoint Counsel (ECF No.
7); Mot. for Recons. re Order on Mot. to Appoint
Counsel (ECF No. 8). This Court awaited the Magistrate
Judge's ruling on the motion for reconsideration before
acting on the objection. On December 20, 2016, the Magistrate
Judge denied Mr. Freeman's motion for reconsideration.
Order on Mot. for Recons. (ECF No. 9). Any
objections to the order on the motion for reconsideration
were due by January 9, 2017. None has been docketed.
Magistrate Judge's orders address a non-dispositive
matter, the standard by which this Court must evaluate the
Magistrate Judge's ruling is whether it is “clearly
erroneous or is contrary to law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a);
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). The Court reviewed the
Magistrate Judge's original order dated November 16, 2016
and, even though the Magistrate Judge's order on the
motion for reconsideration dated December 20, 2016 is not
technically before the Court, the Court reviewed that order
as well. Applying the legal standards, the Court has
concluded that neither order is clearly erroneous or contrary
the Court OVERRULES Andrew J. Freeman's Objection to
Order on Motion to Appoint Counsel (ECF No. 7) and AFFIRMS
the Magistrate Judge's Order on ...