Hill v. CDCR

Filing 36

ORDER denying 35 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 09/21/16. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JAMES HILL,

12
13
14
15
16

No. 2:15-cv-0592-EFB P
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION, 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 that the court appoint counsel. As plaintiff was previously informed,

20

see ECF No. 20, district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in

21

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

22

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

23

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

24

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

25

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

26

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

27

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

28

those factors, the court finds there are no exceptional circumstances in this case.
1

1

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

2

counsel (ECF No. 35) is denied.

3

DATED: September 21, 2016.

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2