Mwasi v. Corcoran State Prison

Filing 42

ORDER Denying Motion For Appointment Of Counsel (Doc. 39 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 2/4/2015. (Fahrney, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 1:13-cv-00695 AWI-JLT (PC) KING MWASI, Plaintiff, v. CORCORAN STATE PRISON, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL (Doc. 39) Defendant. 16 17 On January 28, 2015, plaintiff filed a motion seeking the appointment of counsel. This is 18 the second such motion filed by Plaintiff. As he was advised previously, Plaintiff does not have a 19 constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 20 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require an attorney to represent plaintiff pursuant to 28 21 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 22 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). However, in certain exceptional circumstances the court may request 23 the voluntary assistance of counsel 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 of 27 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 Despite being advised of these standards previously, Plaintiff again iterates the difficulty 2 of litigating this matter while in prison. Unfortunately, the Court has hundreds of cases with 3 inmates facing the same situation. Virtually none of them have had any legal training, they do not 4 have the amount of law library access they would like, they are concerned about their ability to 5 handle trial and they all believe their case is of such complexity as to warrant appointment of 6 counsel. 7 However, once again, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. The 8 fact that Plaintiff is not well-versed in the law or its procedures and the fact that he has made 9 serious allegations which, if proved, would entitle him to relief, does not make this case 10 exceptional. To the contrary, this court is faced with similar cases every day. Further, as the 11 Court informed him before, at this early stage in the proceedings, it cannot determine whether 12 Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits, and based on a review of the record in this case, the 13 14 15 16 17 court does not find that plaintiff cannot adequately articulate his claims. Id. Conversely, Plaintiff has more than demonstrated his ability to communicate in writing. For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff=s motion for the appointment of counsel is HEREBY DENIED, without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 19 Dated: February 4, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?