Stoops v. Sherman, et al.

Filing 21

ORDER DENYING, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, Plaintiff's Second Motion for Appointment of Counsel 20 , signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 6/1/17. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RANDY STOOPS,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.
STUART SHERMAN, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16

ORDER DENYING, WITHOUT PREJUDICE,
PLAINTIFF’S SECOND MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
[ECF No. 20]

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s second motion for appointment of counsel, filed May

19
20

Case No.: 1:16-cv-01026-AWI-SAB (PC)

Plaintiff Randy Stoops is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action

17
18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

30, 2017.
As Plaintiff was previously advised, he does not have a constitutional right to appointed

21
22

counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the Court cannot

23

require an attorney to represent Plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States

24

District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). However, in certain

25

exceptional circumstances the Court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to

26

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

27

///

28

///
1

1

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

2

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

3

circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success of the merits [and]

4

the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues

5

involved.@ Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).
In the present case, the Court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Even if it

6
7

is assumed that Plaintiff is not well versed in the law and that he has made serious allegations which, if

8

proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is not exceptional. This Court is faced with similar cases

9

almost daily. Further, at this early stage in the proceedings, the Court cannot make a determination

10

that Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits, and based on a review of the record in this case, the

11

Court does not find that Plaintiff cannot adequately articulate his claims. Id.
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff=s second motion for the appointment of counsel is

12
13

HEREBY DENIED, without prejudice.

14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16

Dated:

17

June 1, 2017
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2