Turner v. Dickinson et al
Filing
54
ORDER denying 51 Motion to Appoint Counsel and medical expert signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/07/13. (Plummer, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
NATHAN KEVIN TURNER,
Plaintiff,
11
12
13
14
No. 2:09-cv-00632 GEB DAD P
vs.
KATHLINE DICKINSON, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER
/
15
16
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to
17
42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed with this action in forma pauperis
18
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
19
On December 28, 2012, plaintiff filed a request for appointment of both counsel
20
and a medical expert to assist him in this action. The expenditure of public funds on behalf of an
21
indigent litigant is proper only when authorized by Congress. Tedder v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210 (9th
22
Cir. 1989). The in forma pauperis statute does not authorize the expenditure of public funds for
23
medical experts. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
24
As to plaintiff’s request for the appointment of counsel, the United States
25
Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent
26
indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298
1
1
(1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the district court may request the voluntary
2
assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017
3
(9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990).
4
The test for exceptional circumstances requires the court to evaluate the plaintiff’s
5
likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in
6
light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. See Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328,
7
1331 (9th Cir. 1986); Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). Circumstances
8
common to most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not
9
establish exceptional circumstances that would warrant a request for voluntary assistance of
10
counsel. In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances.
11
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's December 28, 2012
12
request for the appointment of both counsel and a medical expert (Doc. No. 51) is denied.
13
DATED: January 7, 2013.
14
15
16
17
DAD:4
turn632.31c
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
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?