Bell v. Lopez et al

Filing 20

ORDER DENYING 17 Motion for the Appointment of Counsel and for Discovery signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 8/12/2011. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

HORACE BELL,

10

Plaintiff,

11
12

CASE NO. 1:10-cv-01762-SKO PC
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR THE
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AND FOR
DISCOVERY

v.
SHERRY LOPEZ, et al.,

13

(Doc. 17)

Defendants.
/

14
15

Plaintiff Horace Bell, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil

16

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on September 24, 2010. On May 9, 2011, Plaintiff filed

17

a motion seeking the appointment of counsel and for leave to review Defendants’ personnel files.

18

Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to the appointment of counsel in this action.

19

Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009); Storseth v. Spellman, 654 F.2d 1349, 1353 (9th

20

Cir. 1981). The Court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

21

1915(e)(1), but it will do so only if exceptional circumstances exist. Palmer, 560 F.3d at 970;

22

Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1981). In making this determination, the

23

Court must evaluate the likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of Plaintiff to articulate

24

his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Palmer, 560 F.3d at 970

25

(citation and quotation marks omitted); Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331. Neither consideration is

26

dispositive and they must be viewed together. Palmer, 560 F.3d at 970 (citation and quotation marks

27

omitted); Wilborn 789 F.2d at 1331.

28

///
1

1

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

2

is able to adequately articulate his claims and in light of the separately issued screening order, the

3

Court cannot find at this juncture that Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits. Therefore,

4

Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel is HEREBY DENIED.

5
6

With respect to reviewing Defendants’ personnel files, discovery is not yet open. Plaintiff’s
request is premature and is HEREBY DENIED on that ground.

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9

Dated:
ie14hj

August 12, 2011

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2