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)

Download PDF
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?