(PC) Jones v. Wong et al
Filing
41
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 09/11/17 DENYING #37 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Plummer, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
ARTHUR GLENN JONES, SR.,
12
13
14
No. 2:15-cv-0734 GEB AC P
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
SAM WONG, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
17
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action, has requested
18
appointment of counsel. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack
19
authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United
20
States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the district
21
court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell
22
v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36
23
(9th Cir. 1990).
24
“When determining whether ‘exceptional circumstances’ exist, a court must consider ‘the
25
likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims
26
pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.’” Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965,
27
970 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983)). The burden
28
of demonstrating exceptional circumstances is on the plaintiff. Id. Circumstances common to
1
1
most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not establish
2
exceptional circumstances that would warrant a request for voluntary assistance of counsel.
3
Plaintiff requests the appointment of counsel to represent him during his deposition on the
4
ground that counsel would enable him to prepare for the deposition more effectively. ECF No. 37
5
at 3. There is no evidence that plaintiff is unable to proceed at a deposition without the assistance
6
of counsel, nor is the taking of his deposition an exceptional circumstance.
7
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of
8
counsel (ECF No. 37) is denied.
9
DATED: September 11, 2017
10
11
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?