Anderson v. Brown et al

Filing 35

ORDER Denying 33 Motion for Appointment of Counsel; ORDER Striking 34 Motion for Extension of Time, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 02/02/15. (Gonzalez, R)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DION ANDERSON, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. JERRY BROWN, et al, 15 Defendants. 1:12-cv-01839 AWI DLB (PC) ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL [ECF No. 33] ORDER STRIKING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME [ECF No. 34] 16 Plaintiff Dion Anderson (“Plaintiff”) is prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights 17 18 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 25, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking the 19 appointment of counsel. Also on September 25, 2014, a motion for an extension of time was 20 erroneously filed in this case. 21 22 I. Motion for the Appointment of Counsel Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. 23 Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require an attorney to 24 represent plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for 25 the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298, 109 S.Ct. 1814, 1816 (1989). However, in 26 certain exceptional circumstances the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel 27 pursuant to section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. 28 Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the court will seek 1 1 volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether 2 Aexceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success on 3 the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the 4 complexity of the legal issues involved.@ Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). 5 In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Even 6 if it is assumed that plaintiff is not well versed in the law and that he has made serious allegations 7 which, if proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is not exceptional. This court is faced with 8 similar cases almost daily. Further, at this stage in the proceedings, the court cannot make a 9 determination that plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits, and based on a review of the record 10 11 12 in this case, the court does not find that plaintiff cannot adequately articulate his claims. Id. For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff=s motion for the appointment of counsel is HEREBY DENIED, without prejudice. 13 II. Motion for Extension of Time 14 On September 25, 2014, a motion for extension of time was filed in this case. However, 15 the motion was erroneously filed since it pertains to another plaintiff in another case. Therefore, 16 the motion will be STRICKEN. ORDER 17 18 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 19 1) Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel [ECF No. 33] is DENIED, without 20 21 prejudice; and 2) The motion for extension of time [ECF No. 34] is STRICKEN. 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 24 Dated: /s/ Dennis February 2, 2015 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 25 26 27 28 L. Beck 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?