Lacey v. Torruella et al

Filing 16

ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lloyd D. George on 3/18/2011 DENYING plaintiff's 14 Motion for Appointment of Counsel. (Marciel, M)

(PC) Lacey v. Torruella et al

Doc. 16

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ________________________ Lloyd D. George United States District Judge DATED this ____ day of March, 2011. On December 19, 2008, Petitioner filed a motion for appointment of counsel (#11) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3006(a)(2)(B). On October 9, 2009, the Court denied Petitioner's motion (#13). Petitioner has filed another, almost identical, motion for appointment of counsel. In order for the motion to be granted, Petitioner must show exceptional circumstances, including the likelihood of success on the merits and the inability of the pro se litigant to articulate his claims in light of the complexity of the issues involved. Willborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986). Petitioner has not shown either of the exceptional circumstances, nor does Petitioner present any new arguments for the Court's consideration. Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that Petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel (#14) is DENIED. v. J. TORRUELLA, Respondent. ROBERT E. LACEY, Petitioner, ORDER 2:07-cv-2254-LDG UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Dockets.Justia.com