(PC)Candler v. Doe

Filing 66

ORDER SUMMARILY DENYING Plaintiff's Ninth 65 Motion for Appointment of Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 5/8/2024. The court will consider no more requests from the plaintiff on this subject matter. (Xiong, J.)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

STEVEN RANAE GLEEN CANDLER,

5

Plaintiff,

6
7

v.
JOHN & JANE DOES, et al.,

8

No. 1:23-cv-00459-JLT-SAB (PC)
ORDER SUMMARILY DENYING
PLAINTIFF’S NINTH MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
(ECF No. 65)

Defendants.

9
Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant
10
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
11
12

Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s ninth motion for appointment of counsel, filed
May 6, 2024. Plaintiff seeks appointment of counsel under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S.

13

668 (1984), which applies to the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel in

14

criminal proceedings.

15

Plaintiff is well aware that he does not have a constitutional right to appointment of

16

counsel in this case and all prior seven motions for appointment of counsel have been denied.

17

(ECF Nos. 24, 29, 33, 36, 48, 50, 59.) Plaintiff has yet again failed to demonstrate extraordinary

18

circumstances to warrant the appointment of counsel and there continues to be no basis to warrant

19

appointment of counsel. Therefore, Plaintiff’s ninth motion for appointment of counsel is

20
21

summarily denied.

The court will consider no more requests from the plaintiff on this subject

matter. As this is a civil case brought by the Plaintiff, it is time for Plaintiff to proceed with his
action.

22
23
24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

May 8, 2024
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

26
27
28
1