Williams v. Anderson
Filing
73
ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion For Appointment Of Counsel And/Or Assistance From The Court Regarding Falsification Of Swon Declarations (ECF No. 72 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 9/2/2014. (Fahrney, E)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
SYLESTER WILLIAMS,
12
13
14
Plaintiff,
v.
SERGEANT R. ANDERSON, et al.,
15
Defendant.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 1:10-cv-01250-SAB (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AND/OR
ASSISTANCE FROM THE COURT REGARDING
FALSIFICATION OF SWON DECLARATIONS
[ECF No. 72]
Plaintiff Sylester Williams is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel, filed August
22, 2014.
On July 7, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment, and, on July 24, 2014,
Defendant Anderson filed a motion for summary judgment.
Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to the appointment of counsel in this action.
24
Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009); Storseth v. Spellman, 654 F.2d 1349, 1353 (9th
25
Cir. 1981). The Court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
26
1915(e)(1), but it will do so only if exceptional circumstances exist. Palmer, 560 F.3d at 970; Wilborn
27
v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986). In making this determination, the Court must
28
evaluate the likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of Plaintiff to articulate his claims pro
1
1
se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Palmer at 970 (citation and quotation marks
2
omitted); Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331. Neither consideration is dispositive and they must be viewed
3
together. Palmer, 560 F.3d at 970 (citation and quotation marks omitted); Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331.
Plaintiff requests the appointment of counsel to represent him apparently based on his claim
4
5
that Defendants have submitted false sworn declarations and he is unable to gain access to certain
6
materials. However, Plaintiff primarily focuses on the factual and/or legal allegations set forth in
7
Defendant’s pending motion for summary judgment.
Plaintiff’s arguments to not amount to exceptional circumstances, which requires an evaluation
8
9
of the likelihood of Plaintiff’s success on the merits and the ability to articulate his claims in light of
10
the complexity of the legal issues involved. See Agyeman v. Corrections Corp. of America, 390 F.3d
11
1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004). Plaintiff’s conditions of confinement claim against Defendant Anderson
12
is not complex, and based upon the documents he has filed with the Court, he appears to be more than
13
capable of articulating and presenting his arguments. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for appointment
14
of counsel is DENIED, without prejudice.
15
16
IT IS SO ORDERED.
17
Dated:
18
September 2, 2014
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?