Dasenbrock v. Kings County et al

Filing 116

ORDER DENYING Motion for Appointment of Counsel 113 , signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 1/5/15: Motion is DENIED without prejudice. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ROBIN DASENBROCK,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
KINGS COUNTY, et al.,

1:11-cv-01884-AWI-DLB (PC)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
(Document# 113)

Defendant.

16
17

On December 24, 2014, plaintiff filed a motion seeking the appointment of

18

counsel. Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v.

19

Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require an attorney to

20

represent plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for

21

the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298, 109 S.Ct. 1814, 1816 (1989). However, in

22

certain exceptional circumstances the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel

23

pursuant to section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525.

24

Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the court will seek

25

volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether

26

Aexceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success

27

of the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the

28

complexity of the legal issues involved.@ Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).
1

1

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

2

Even if it is assumed that plaintiff is not well versed in the law and that he has made serious

3

allegations which, if proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is not exceptional. This court is

4

faced with similar cases almost daily. Further, at this early stage in the proceedings, the court

5

cannot make a determination that plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits, and based on a

6

review of the record in this case, the court does not find that plaintiff cannot adequately articulate

7

his claims. Id.

8
9

For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff=s motion for the appointment of counsel is HEREBY
DENIED, without prejudice.

10
IT IS SO ORDERED.
11
12

Dated:

/s/ Dennis

January 5, 2015

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

L. Beck

2