Garcia v. Folks et al

Filing 37

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 9/30/2016 DENYING plaintiff's 35 motion for appointment of counsel. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RAUL GARCIA,

12

No. 2:14-cv-2378 JAM DB P
Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

F. FOLKS, et al.,

15

ORDER

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action, has requested

18

appointment of counsel. In his complaint, plaintiff alleges a First Amendment claim of retaliation

19

and Eighth Amendment claims regarding the mishandling of plaintiff’s food, regarding his living

20

conditions, and regarding his medical needs. In his motion for appointment of counsel, plaintiff

21

states only that he is lay person who cannot afford to hire counsel. (ECF No. 35.)

22

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

23

counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490

24

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

25

voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d

26

1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990).

27

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

28

likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in
1

1

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

2

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

3

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

4

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

5

counsel. In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances.

6

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

7

counsel (ECF No. 35) is denied.

8

Dated: September 30, 2016

9
10
11
12
13
14
15

DLB:9
DLB1/prisoner-civil rights/garc2378.31

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2