Mahone v. McCarthy et al

Filing 25

ORDER denying 6 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Judge J Richard Creatura.(MET) cc: plaintiff

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

8
9
10

SYLVESTER JAMES MAHONE,
Plaintiff,

11
12
13
14

v.
PAT MCCARTHY, PAUL PASTOR,
EDDIE PARKER, BALDEROMA,
MARVIN SPENCER, MARTHA KARR,
DANIELS, KATHY MILLER, CARN.

CASE NO. C14-5812 BHS-JRC
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF
COUNSEL

15
Defendants.
16
17

The District Court has referred this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action to United States

18 Magistrate Judge J. Richard Creatura pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B), and local
19 Magistrate Judge Rules MJR1, MJR3 and MJR4.
20

Currently before the Court is plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel (Dkt. 6).

21 Plaintiff states that the action is complex and that he is an inmate confined in the segregation unit
22 of the Pierce County Jail (Dkt. 6). Plaintiff has a degree as a paralegal (Dkt. 6). Defendants
23 oppose plaintiff’s motion stating that plaintiff is being held on new criminal charges resulting
24 from allegedly threatening a corrections officer and his family. Defendants note that plaintiff is
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL - 1

1 currently representing himself in his criminal matter and is far more qualified and capable than
2 the “typical pro se inmate litigant.” (Dkt. 22, p. 3).
3

There is no right to have counsel appointed in cases brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

4 Although the Court can request counsel to represent a party, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), the Court may
5 do so only in exceptional circumstances. Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir.
6 1986); Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1236 (9th Cir. 1984); Aldabe v. Aldabe, 616 F.2d 1089
7 (9th Cir. 1980). A finding of exceptional circumstances requires the Court to evaluate both the
8
9
10
11

likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of
the complexity of the legal issues involved. Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331.
Plaintiff is capable of articulating his claims. The Court record reflects that he is conducting
discovery (Dkt. 19 request for additional time to respond to discovery requests). The Court is not
currently in a position to determine plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits, but that is due to

12
the early status of the case and not plaintiff’s inability to articulate his claims. The Court does not

13
find exceptional circumstances that would warrant appointment of counsel at this time.

14
Accordingly, the Court denies plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel.

15

Dated this 28th day of January, 2015.

16

A

17

J. Richard Creatura
United States Magistrate Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL - 2