Greene v. Espiritu et al

Filing 25

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Request Legal Counsel Doc. 16 is DENIED without prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge David K Duncan on 9/20/11.(KAD)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Brian Henry Greene,
Plaintiff,

10
11

vs.

12

Redentor Espiritu, et al.,
Defendants.

13
14

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CIV 11-0206-PHX-NVW (DKD)

ORDER

15

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Request Legal Counsel (Doc. 16).

16

Plaintiff requests that the court appoint counsel because he is being medicated through the

17

mental health services and does not understand the legal issues in this matter. Plaintiff further

18

states that he has relied on his cell mate at times to prepare his paperwork and that his cell mate

19

could be transferred leaving him without any assists. Defendants oppose Plaintiff’s request

20

(Doc. 19).

21

There is no constitutional right to appointment of counsel in a civil case. See Johnson

22

v. Dep't of Treasury, 939 F.2d 820, 824 (9th Cir. 1991). Appointment of counsel in a civil rights

23

case is required only when exceptional circumstances are present. Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d

24

1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991) (citing Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986)).

25

In determining whether to appoint counsel, the court should consider the likelihood of success

26

on the merits, and the ability of plaintiff to articulate his claims in view of their complexity.

27

Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335 (9th Cir. 1990).

28

1

Plaintiff has not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits, nor has he shown

2

that he is experiencing difficulty in litigating this case because of the complexity of the issues

3

involved. Moreover, Plaintiff’s numerous filings with the Court as well as the pending motion,

4

indicate that Plaintiff is capable of presenting legal and factual arguments to the Court. After

5

reviewing the file, the Court determines that this case does not present exceptional

6

circumstances requiring the appointment of counsel.

7

Accordingly,

8

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Request Legal Counsel (Doc.

9
10

16) is DENIED without prejudice.
DATED this 20th day of September, 2011.

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-