(PC) Perez v. Lorman ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 LISA BELYEW, No. 2:17-cv-0723 MCE CKD P 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER 13 LARRY LORMAN, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. Plaintiff requests that the court 17 appoint counsel. District courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners 18 in section 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In 19 exceptional circumstances, the court may request an attorney to voluntarily represent such a 20 plaintiff. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); 21 Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). When determining whether 22 “exceptional circumstances” exist, the court must consider plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the 23 merits as well as the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity 24 of the legal issues involved. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (district court 25 did not abuse discretion in declining to appoint counsel). The burden of demonstrating 26 exceptional circumstances is on the plaintiff. Id. Circumstances common to most prisoners, such 27 as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not establish exceptional 28 circumstances that warrant a request for voluntary assistance of counsel. 1 Having considered the factors under Palmer, the court finds that plaintiff has failed to 2 | meet his burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of 3 | counsel at this time. 4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for the appointment of 5 || counsel (ECF No. 78) is denied. 6 | Dated: March 17, 2020 f° Lf i, / , CAN fu fl. ay CAROLYN K. DELANEY g UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 | imp D bely0723.31 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28