Bowen v. Cate et al
Filing
53
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/28/14 DENYING 38 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Dillon, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
BURCH MICHAEL BOWEN,
12
13
14
15
No. 2:12-cv-1519 MCE AC P
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
MATTHEW CATE, et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
18
19
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action, has requested
appointment of counsel.
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require
20
counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490
21
U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the district court may request the
22
voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d
23
1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (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. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th
27
Cir. 2009) (district court did not abuse discretion in declining to appoint counsel); Wilborn v.
28
Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986); Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir.
1
1
1983). Circumstances common to most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law
2
library access, do not establish exceptional circumstances that would warrant a request for
3
voluntary assistance of counsel.
4
Plaintiff was appointed counsel for the limited purpose of drafting and filing an amended,
5
and then a second amended, complaint. ECF Nos. 13, 17. That limited appointment expired with
6
the filing of the second amended complaint. See Order at ECF No. 24. The court does not find
7
that exceptional circumstances exist at this time to support further appointment of counsel.
8
Plaintiff’s request for the appointment of counsel will therefore be denied.
9
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s July 28, 2014 motion for the
10
appointment of counsel (ECF No. 38) is denied.
11
DATED: October 28, 2014
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?