James v. County of Sacramento et al

Filing 28

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/03/11 denying 27 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Plaintiff's request that defendant Kendrick be dismissed 27 is granted. Defendant Kendrick is dismissed from this action. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

WILLIAM JAMES,
Plaintiff,

11
12
13
14

vs.
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al.,
Defendants.

17

ORDER
/

15
16

No. CIV S-10-0664 MCE DAD P

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action, has
requested appointment of counsel.

18

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to

19

require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist.

20

Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the district court may

21

request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v.

22

Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36

23

(9th Cir. 1990).

24

The test for exceptional circumstances requires the court to evaluate the plaintiff’s

25

likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in

26

light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. See Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328,
1

1

1331 (9th Cir. 1986); Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). Circumstances

2

common to most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not

3

establish exceptional circumstances that would warrant a request for voluntary assistance of

4

counsel. In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances.
Plaintiff has also requested that defendant Kendrick be dismissed from this action.

5
6

Good cause appearing, plaintiff's request shall be honored.

7

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

8

1. Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. No. 27) is denied;

9

2. Plaintiff’s request that defendant Kendrick be dismissed (Doc. No. 27) is

10

granted; and
3. Defendant Kendrick is dismissed from this action.

11
12

DATED: October 3, 2011.

13
14
15

DAD:9:md
jame0664.31

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2