Hernandez-Vargas v. United States of America

Filing 17

ORDER denying 8 Plaintiff's Motion for Transcripts; denying 9 Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel ; denied as moot 15 Plaintiff's Motion to Compel, signed by Judge Ronald B. Leighton.(DN) Modified on 5/16/2012 (DN). (cc to pltf)

HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

7
8
9

12
13

ORDER

Plaintiff,

10
11

No. 11-CV-5957 RBL

ANDRES HERNANDEZ-VARGAS,

[Dkts. #8, 9, 15]

v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.

14
15
16
17
18

Petitioner, seeking habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, requests copies of transcripts of
his trial and hearings from the clerk without making payment and moves for appointment of
counsel. Upon review, the Court must deny the motions.
MOTION FOR TRANSCRIPTS
Petitioner requests an “informal loan of Court documents,” relating to certain hearings

19

and days of trial. Pet.’s Mot. at 1 (Dkt. #8). These documents are available through the Clerk’s
20

office for a fee. Petitioner has not shown grounds to avoid the usual costs of copying.
21

MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
22

No constitutional right to counsel exists for an indigent plaintiff in a civil case unless the
23

plaintiff may lose his physical liberty if he loses the litigation. See Lassiter v. Dept. of Social
24

Servs., 452 U.S. 18, 25 (1981). However, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), the Court has the
25

discretion to appoint counsel for indigent litigants who are proceeding IFP. United States v.
26

$292,888.04 in U.S. Currency, 54 F.3d 564, 569 (9th Cir. 1995). The Court will appoint counsel
27

only under “exceptional circumstances.” Id.; Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th
28

Order - 1

1

Cir. 1986). “A finding of exceptional circumstances requires an evaluation of both the likelihood

2

of success on the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of

3

the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331 (internal quotations

4

omitted). These factors must be viewed together before reaching a decision on whether to

5

appoint counsel under § 1915(e)(1). Id.

6
7

Here, Petitioner has thus far adequately explained the grounds for his claims, which do
not appear sufficiently strong or complex to warrant counsel.
CONCLUSION

8
9

For the reasons stated above, the Court DENIES the motions for transcripts (Dkt. #8) and

10

the motion to appoint counsel (Dkt. #9). In light of these findings, Petitioner’s motion to compel

11

is DENIED as moot (Dkt. #15).

12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Dated this 16th day of May 2012.

A
Ronald B. Leighton
United States District Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Order - 2