Slaughter v. White

Filing 25

ORDER on 23 MOTION for Reconsideration: Petitioner's concern regarding limited access to the law library can be addressed with a motion for extension of time. Based on the foregoing discussion, petitioner's 23 motion for reconsideration is DENIED. Signed by Judge Theresa L Fricke. **4 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(Ossie Slaughter, Prisoner ID: 827869)(SP)

Case 2:21-cv-01421-JLR-TLF Document 25 Filed 05/06/22 Page 1 of 4

1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

4
5
6

OSSIE LEE SLAUGHTER,
Case No. 2:21-1421-JLR-TLF

7
8
9

Petitioner,

DANIEL WHITE,
Respondent.

10
11

ORDER ON MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION

v.

This matter comes before the Court on petitioner’s motion for reconsideration.

12

Dkt. 23. For the reasons set forth herein, petitioner’s motion for reconsideration is

13

DENIED.

14
15

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Petitioner filed a motion requesting appointment of counsel. Dkt. 18. Petitioner’s

16

motion requested appointment of counsel because he had been transferred to a

17

different correctional facility and did not have access to a law library. Dkt. 18. Petitioner

18

stated that the nearest available law library was in a facility that was under a quarantine

19

due to a COVID 19 outbreak. Dkt. 18. The Court denied petitioner’s motion for

20

appointment of counsel without prejudice and granted petitioner an extension of time to

21

file a reply brief. Dkt. 20.

22
23

Petitioner has filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court’s Order Denying
Appointment of Counsel. Dkt. 23. Petitioner’s motion argues that he is still being denied

24
25
26

ORDER ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 1

Case 2:21-cv-01421-JLR-TLF Document 25 Filed 05/06/22 Page 2 of 4

1

adequate access to the law library because the law library in his housing assignment

2

has limited hours. Dkt. 23. Petitioner states that due to the limited hours he is only able

3

to research a limited number of cases. Dkt. 23. Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration

4

also argues – for the first time – that the Court should hold an evidentiary hearing and

5

appoint counsel for the evidentiary hearing. Dkt. 23.

6

DISCUSSION

7

Motions for reconsideration are generally disfavored under the Court’s local

8
9
10

rules:
Motions for reconsideration are disfavored. The court will ordinarily deny
such motions in the absence of a showing of manifest error in the prior
ruling or a showing of new facts or legal authority which could not have
been brought to its attention earlier with reasonable diligence.

11
12

Local Rules W.D. Wash. CR 7(h)(1). Such motions are an “extraordinary remedy,” and

13

“should not be granted, absent highly unusual circumstances, unless the district court is

14

presented with newly discovered evidence, committed clear error, or if there is an

15

intervening change in the controlling law.” Kona Enters., Inc. v. Estate of Bishop, 229

16

F.3d 877, 890 (9th Cir. 2000) (internal citations omitted).

17

The Court declines to consider petitioner’s request that the Court order an

18

evidentiary hearing and appoint counsel for the evidentiary hearing. Petitioner argues

19

that the Court should hold an evidentiary hearing to determine whether -- based on the

20

record before the state courts -- the state courts erred by unreasonably applying clearly

21

establish federal law. Dkt. 23. Petitioner raises this argument for the first time in the

22

motion for reconsideration. New evidence, facts or legal authority can only be

23

considered on a motion for reconsideration if the information could not have been

24
25
26

ORDER ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 2

Case 2:21-cv-01421-JLR-TLF Document 25 Filed 05/06/22 Page 3 of 4

1

brought to the Court’s attention earlier with reasonable diligence. Local Rules W.D.

2

Wash. CR 7(h)(1). Petitioner could have raised this issue in the previous motion for

3

appointment of counsel, or the initial petition. Petitioner’s request for an evidentiary

4

hearing is not properly before the Court on petitioner’s motion for reconsideration.

5

The Court may request an attorney to represent an indigent litigant under 28

6

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) but should do so only under “exceptional circumstances.” Agyeman

7

v. Corrections Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004). “A finding of

8

exceptional circumstances requires an evaluation of both the likelihood of success on

9

the merits and the ability of the petitioner to articulate his claims pro se in light of the

10

complexity of the legal issues involved. Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331

11

(9th Cir. 1986). These factors must be viewed together before reaching a decision on a

12

request for counsel under § 1915(e)(1). Id.

13

The Court previously determined that this matter does not present exceptional

14

circumstances supporting appointment of counsel. Dkt. 20. Petitioner has not provided

15

any new arguments, legal authority or evidence indicating that petitioner is unable to

16

effectively articulate his grounds for relief in the petition or otherwise present his claims

17

in this action.

18

Additionally, petitioner’s previous motion stated that due to a COVID-19 outbreak

19

he could not access a law library. Dkt. 19. The Court explained that petitioner’s

20

argument regarding lack of access to a law library could be addressed by petitioner’s

21

motion for extension of time. Dkt. 20. Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration states that

22

now petitioner does have access to the law library but is only allowed a limited time to

23
24
25
26

ORDER ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 3

Case 2:21-cv-01421-JLR-TLF Document 25 Filed 05/06/22 Page 4 of 4

1

research case law. Dkt. 23. Petitioner’s concern regarding limited access to the law

2

library can be addressed with a motion for extension of time.

3
4
5
6

CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing discussion, petitioner’s motion for reconsideration (Dkt.
23) is DENIED.
Dated this 6th day of May, 2022.

7
8

a

9

Theresa L. Fricke
United States Magistrate Judge

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

ORDER ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 4