Spinal cord epidural stimulation (scES) has enabled volitional lower extremity movements in individuals with chronic and clinically motor complete spinal cord injury and no clinically detectable brain influence. The aim of this study was to understand whether the individuals' neuroanatomical characteristics or positioning of the scES electrode were important factors influencing the extent of initial recovery of lower limb voluntary movements in those with clinically motor complete paralysis. We hypothesized that there would be significant correlations between the number of joints moved during attempts with scES prior to any training interventions and the amount of cervical cord atrophy above the injury, length of post-traumatic myelomalacia and the amount of volume coverage of lumbosacral enlargement by the stimulation electrode array. The clinical and imaging records of 20 individuals with chronic and clinically motor complete spinal cord injury who underwent scES implantation were reviewed and analysed using MRI and X-ray integration, image segmentation and spinal cord volumetric reconstruction techniques. All individuals that participated in the scES study (n = 20) achieved, to some extent, lower extremity voluntary movements post scES implant and prior to any locomotor, voluntary movement or cardiovascular training. The correlation results showed that neither the cross-section area of spinal cord at C3 (n = 19, r = 0.33, P = 0.16) nor the length of severe myelomalacia (n = 18, r = -0.02, P = 0.93) correlated significantly with volitional lower limb movement ability. However, there was a significant, moderate correlation (n = 20, r = 0.59, P = 0.006) between the estimated percentage of the lumbosacral enlargement coverage by the paddle electrode as well as the position of the paddle relative to the maximal lumbosacral enlargement and the conus tip (n = 20, r = 0.50, P = 0.026) with the number of joints moved volitionally. These results suggest that greater coverage of the lumbosacral enlargement by scES may improve motor recovery prior to any training, possibly because of direct modulatory effects on the spinal networks that control lower extremity movements indicating the significant role of motor control at the level of the spinal cord.