Flournoy v. Sacramento County Sheriff Dept et al

Filing 184

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 1/11/2018 DENYING plaintiff's 183 request for counsel or an extension of time to locate counsel. If plaintiff fails to file objections to the court's September 25, 2017 findings and recommendation (ECF No. 175 ) within 45 days, the findings and recommendations will be submitted to the district judge for consideration.(Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JAMES HENRY FLOURNOY,

12
13
14
15
16

No. 2:11-cv-2844-KJM-EFB P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF
DEP’T, et al.,
Defendants.

17
18

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42

19

U.S.C. § 1983. He requests the appointment of counsel, or in the alternative, an extension of time

20

“to find counsel and reply to [the] court’s findings and recommendations.” ECF No. 183.

21

Plaintiff’s motion is denied.

22

District courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section

23

1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional

24

circumstances, the court may request an attorney to voluntarily to represent such a plaintiff. See

25

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1); Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v.

26

Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). When determining whether “exceptional

27

circumstances” exist, the court must consider the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the

28

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

1

involved. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009). Having considered those factors,

2

the court finds there are no exceptional circumstances in this case. Thus, the court declines to

3

appoint counsel in this case. Nor will the court grant plaintiff an extension of time for the

4

purpose of retaining counsel. Plaintiff, who commenced this action over six years ago, has had

5

ample time to find counsel.

6

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s request for the appointment of

7

counsel or an extension of time to locate counsel (ECF No. 183) is denied. If plaintiff fails to file

8

objections to the court’s September 25, 2017 findings and recommendation (ECF No. 175) within

9

45 days, the findings and recommendations will be submitted to the district judge for

10

consideration.

11

DATED: January 11, 2018.

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2