Wilds v. Holland et al

Filing 8

ORDER Denying 3 Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A Boone on 2/20/13. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

NICHOLAS REID WILDS,

10
11

CASE NO. 1:12-cv-01950-SAB (PC)

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

v.
(ECF No. 3)

12

K. HOLLAND, et al.,

13

Defendants.
/

14
15

Plaintiff Nicholas Reid Wilds is a state prisoner appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in

16

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 30, 2012, Plaintiff filed a

17

complaint and motion for appointment of counsel.1

18

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 represent

20

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

21

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

22

circumstances the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to section

23

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

24
25

Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the court will seek
volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases.

In determining whether

26
27
28

1

The court has not yet screened plaintiff’s complaint to determine whether it contains any cognizable claims
for relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The court has many civil cases pending before it and will screen plaintiff’s complaint
in due course.

1

1

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

2

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

3

of the legal issues involved.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).

4

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

5

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

6

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

7

similar cases almost daily alleging violations of the Eighth Amendment. Further, at this early stage

8

in the proceedings, the court cannot make a determination that plaintiff is likely to succeed on the

9

merits.

10

For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel is HEREBY

11

DENIED, without prejudice.

12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13

Dated:
i1eed4

February 20, 2013
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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