(PC) Morgan v. Valley State Prison ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MATTHEW W. MORGAN, 1:20-cv-00029-GSA (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 13 v. APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 14 VALLEY STATE PRISON, et al, (ECF No. 6.) 15 Defendants. 16 17 On January 27, 2020, plaintiff filed a motion seeking the appointment of counsel. Plaintiff 18 does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 19 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require an attorney to represent plaintiff pursuant 20 to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 21 490 U.S. 296, 298, 109 S.Ct. 1814, 1816 (1989). However, in certain exceptional circumstances 22 the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 23 113 F.3d at 1525. 24 Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the court will seek 25 volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether 26 “exceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success of 27 the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity 28 of the legal issues involved.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). 1 In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff 2 alleges that he is mentally incompetent to represent himself and has no knowledge of the law. These 3 circumstances, without more, do not make plaintiff’s case exceptional under the law. On January 4 7, 2020, plaintiff’s claims were severed from the original complaint, a new case was opened for 5 plaintiff, and plaintiff was ordered to file an amended complaint within 30 days. (ECF No. 1.) To 6 date, plaintiff has not filed the amended complaint. 7 Plaintiff alleges that the issues in his case are complex. However, without reviewing 8 plaintiff’s amended complaint, the court cannot determine whether plaintiff can adequately 9 articulate his claims or whether he is likely to succeed on the merits. Therefore, plaintiff’s motion 10 for appointment of counsel shall be denied, without prejudice to renewal of the motion at a later 11 stage of the proceedings. 12 Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion 13 for the appointment of counsel filed on January 27, 2020, is DENIED without prejudice. 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 16 Dated: January 30, 2020 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28