Jarrett v. Arpaio et al

Filing 27

ORDER denying Plaintiff's 19 Motion for Appointment of Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge David K Duncan on 8/14/2013.(LFIG)

Download PDF
Jarrett v. Arpaio et al 1 Doc. 27 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Ricky Lee Jarrett, Plaintiff, 10 11 vs. 12 Joseph M. Arpaio, et al., Defendants. 13 14 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV-13-0440-PHX-JAT (DKD) ORDER 15 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. 19). 16 Plaintiff’s first request for the appointment of counsel was denied on June 6, 2013 (Doc. 8). As 17 previously stated, there is no constitutional right to appointment of counsel in a civil case. See 18 Johnson v. Dep't of Treasury, 939 F.2d 820, 824 (9th Cir. 1991). Appointment of counsel in a 19 civil rights case is required only when exceptional circumstances are present. Terrell v. Brewer, 20 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991) (citing Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 21 1986)). Plaintiff has again failed to demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits, and has 22 not shown that he is experiencing difficulty in litigating this case because of the complexity of 23 the issues involved. Accordingly, 24 25 26 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. 19). DATED this 14th day of August, 2013. 27 28 Dockets.Justia.com

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?