Meador v. Brown et al
Filing
32
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/25/18 DENYING 24 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Coll, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
GORDON DALE MEADOR,
12
13
14
15
No. 2:18-cv-0696 KJM AC P
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
JERRY BROWN, et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action, has requested
18
appointment of counsel. ECF No. 24. Plaintiff asserts that counsel should be appointed because
19
his case has become extremely complex, he is a “layman at law,” he believes his case has merit,
20
and “his very life is at issue.” See id. at 1.
21
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require
22
counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490
23
U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the district court may request the
24
voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d
25
1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990).
26
The test for exceptional circumstances requires the court to evaluate the plaintiff’s
27
likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in
28
light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. See Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328,
1
1
1331 (9th Cir. 1986); Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). Circumstances
2
common to most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not
3
establish exceptional circumstances that would warrant a request for voluntary assistance of
4
counsel.
5
To date, plaintiff has adequately articulated and litigated his claims. Moreover, plaintiff
6
fails to indicate how this case has recently become “extremely complex” or precisely how “his
7
very life is at issue” as he contends. For these reasons, the court does not find the required
8
exceptional circumstances.
9
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of
10
counsel (ECF No. 24) is denied.
11
DATED: October 25, 2018
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?