Wilhelm v. Rotman et al

Filing 66

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion To Appoint Counsel (Document 65 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 12/8/2014. (Fahrney, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
STEVEN HAIRL WILHELM,

10

Plaintiff,

11

Case No. 1:10-cv-00001 DLB PC
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL

v.

12

(Document 65)
DR. ARON ROTMAN,

13

Defendant.

14

_____________________________________/

15
16
17

Plaintiff Steven Hairl Wilhelm (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in
forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on December 31, 2009.1

18

Plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel on December 4, 2014.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to the appointment of counsel in this action.
Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009); Storseth v. Spellman, 654 F.2d 1349, 1353
(9th Cir. 1981). The Court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(1), but it will do so only if exceptional circumstances exist. Palmer, 560 F.3d at 970;
Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986). In making this determination, the
Court must evaluate the likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of Plaintiff to articulate
his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Palmer, 560 F.3d at 970
(citation and quotation marks omitted); Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331. Neither consideration is

27
28

1

Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge on February 3, 2010. Defendant Rotman
filed his consent on October 20, 2014.

1 dispositive and they must be viewed together. Palmer, 560 F.3d at 970 (citation and quotation
2 marks omitted); Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331.
3

In the present case, the Court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Even

4 if it is assumed that Plaintiff is not well versed in the law and that he has made serious allegations
5 which, if proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is not exceptional. The Court is faced with
6 similar cases almost daily. Moreover, the Court does not find that Plaintiff cannot adequately
7 articulate his claims.
8

Therefore, Plaintiff’s request for the appointment of counsel is HEREBY DENIED.

9
10
11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Dennis

December 8, 2014

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2