Jackson v. Willis 

In section 1983 action by plaintiff-prisoner against defendants-prison officials, alleging that he experienced excessive force, and that defendants had failed to protect him from inmates by refusing his request to be placed in prison in which he had no known enemies, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying plaintiff’s request to continue his trial after it had granted request by plaintiff’s appointed counsel to withdraw from case on day prior to trial. Both counsel and plaintiff stated that plaintiff did not personally trust counsel, and Dist. Ct. mitigated any adverse impact caused by late withdrawal of counsel, where: (1) Dist. Ct. required counsel to remain as standby counsel; (2) plaintiff was familiar with facts of case that was already 32 months old; (3) plaintiff had prior experience litigating matters; and (4) continuance would work hardship on assembled jurors. Fact that plaintiff’s request for continuance was his first request for continuance did not require different result. Dist. Ct. also did not commit plain error in admitting evidence of defendant’s prior burglary conviction or his May 2007 disciplinary report, where: (1) plaintiff had revealed existence of his burglary conviction in his opening statement; and (2) details of May 2007 report served to impeach defendant’s claim that he should have been allowed to refuse instant transfer, where he had previously been allowed to refuse transfer to different prison.