(PS) Singh v. Blizzard et al

Filing 17

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Sean C. Riordan on 01/06/2025 DENYING Plaintiff's 15 Motion to Appoint Counsel without prejudice. (Deputy Clerk KS)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RAGHVENDRA SINGH,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

No. 2:23-cv-0024-DC-SCR

ORDER

14

THADD A. BLIZZARD, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a former county inmate proceeding without a lawyer in this civil rights action

18

filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff requests that the court appoint counsel. ECF No. 15.

19

District courts lack authority under 28 U.S.C. §1915 to require counsel to represent indigent

20

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

21

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

22

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

23

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

24

“exceptional circumstances” exist, the court must consider plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the

25

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

26

of the legal issues involved. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (district court

27

did not abuse discretion in declining to appoint counsel). The burden of demonstrating

28

exceptional circumstances is on the plaintiff. Id. Circumstances common to most prisoners, such
1

1

as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not establish exceptional

2

circumstances that warrant a request for voluntary assistance of counsel.

3

Having considered the factors under Palmer, the court finds that plaintiff has failed to

4

meet his burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of

5

counsel at this time.

6

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

7

counsel (ECF No. 15) is denied without prejudice.

8

DATED: January 6, 2025

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