Aguilera v. City of Las Cruces, 2:25-cv-00255

Plaintiff Eddie Aguilera filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the City of Las Cruces and two individuals, asserting violations of his federal rights.
Aguilera originally filed the case alongside three other plaintiffs, but subsequently filed an amended complaint and an amended application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs (in forma pauperis).
The Court identified deficiencies in the original filings, prompting Aguilera to submit amended documents.
Aguilera also requested the Court appoint counsel for him, citing the complexity of the case and his inability to afford an attorney.
The Court addressed whether Aguilera’s financial status justified waiving court fees and whether he was entitled to appointed counsel.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
In forma pauperis application	Aguilera cannot pay fees due to low income and dependents	Not presented	Granted: Aguilera qualifies
Appointment of counsel	Case is too complex & he cannot afford counsel	Not presented	Denied: no right to counsel

Adkins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331 (U.S. 1948) (standard for granting in forma pauperis status: litigant need not be destitute, but unable to pay and provide necessities)
Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for S. Dist. of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296 (U.S. 1989) (courts may not require unwilling attorneys to represent indigent civil litigants)
Castner v. Colo. Springs Cablevision, 979 F.2d 1417 (10th Cir. 1992) (appointment of counsel in civil cases is within the court’s discretion)