Carreon v. Banke et al

Filing 27

ORDER denying 25 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 11/28/12. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

DANIEL CARREON, JR.,
Plaintiff,

11
12

vs.

13

No. 2:11-cv-2952 WBS EFB P

S. BANKE, et al.,
Defendants.

14

ORDER
/

15

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

16
17

U.S.C. § 1983. He once again requests that the court appoint counsel. As plaintiff was

18

previously informed, district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent

19

prisoners in section 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989).

20

In exceptional circumstances, the court may request an attorney to voluntarily to represent such a

21

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

22

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

23

“exceptional circumstances” exist, the court must consider the likelihood of success on the

24

merits as well as the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the

25

complexity of the legal issues involved. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009).

26

////
1

1

Having considered those factors, the court still finds there are no exceptional circumstances in

2

this case.

3

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

4

counsel, Dckt. No. 25, is denied.

5

DATED: November 28, 2012.

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2