Nance v. Miser et al

Filing 30

ORDER denying without prejudice 21 Motion for Appointment of Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge David K Duncan on 11/2/12.(DMT)

Download PDF
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Keith P. Nance, Plaintiff, 10 11 vs. 12 Allen Miser, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV 12-0734-PHX-RCB (DKD) ORDER 15 This matter arises on Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. 21). Plaintiff 16 requests that the court appoint counsel because he lacks legal training, cannot afford counsel, 17 and because the issues in this matter are complex. Defendants take no position on Plaintiff’s 18 Motion (Doc. 25). 19 There is no constitutional right to appointment of counsel in a civil case. See Johnson 20 v. Dep't of Treasury, 939 F.2d 820, 824 (9th Cir. 1991). Appointment of counsel in a civil rights 21 case is required only when exceptional circumstances are present. Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 22 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991) (citing Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986)). 23 In determining whether to appoint counsel, the court should consider the likelihood of success 24 on the merits, and the ability of plaintiff to articulate his claims in view of their complexity. 25 Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335 (9th Cir. 1990). 26 Plaintiff has not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits, nor has he shown 27 that he is experiencing difficulty in litigating this case because of the complexity of the issues 28 involved. Moreover, Plaintiff’s numerous filings with the Court as well as the pending motion, 1 indicate that Plaintiff is capable of presenting legal and factual arguments to the Court. After 2 reviewing the file, the Court determines that this case does not present exceptional 3 circumstances requiring the appointment of counsel. 4 Accordingly, 5 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. 6 7 21) is DENIED without prejudice. DATED this 2nd day of November, 2012. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?