Glaze v. Stane et al

Filing 18

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 16 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 03/30/2015. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RODNEY GLAZE, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. STANE, et al., Defendants. 16 17 18 19 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 1:14-cv-01153-SAB (PC) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL [ECF No. 16] Plaintiff Rodney Glaze is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 26, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking the appointment of counsel. Plaintiff 20 does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 21 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require any attorney to represent plaintiff pursuant to 22 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 23 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). However, in certain exceptional circumstances the court may request the 24 voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. 25 Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the court will seek 26 volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether 27 “exceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success on the 28 1 1 merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the 2 legal issues involved.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). 3 In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Even if it 4 assumed that plaintiff is not well versed in the law and that he has made serious allegations which, if 5 proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is not exceptional. The legal issues present in this action 6 are not complex, and Plaintiff has thoroughly set forth his allegations in the complaint. However, at 7 this early stage in the proceedings, the Court cannot make a determination that Plaintiff is likely to 8 succeed on the merits, and based on a review of the record in this case, the court does not find that 9 plaintiff cannot adequately articulate his claims. Id. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel is HEREBY 10 11 DENIED, without prejudice. 12 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 Dated: 15 March 30, 2015 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 19 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?