(PC) Tucker v. Lizarraga ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANDREW MICHAEL TUCKER, Case No. 1:19-cv-00736-AWI-JDP 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 13 v. FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 14 JOE A. LIZARRAGA, et al., ECF No. 26 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff Andrew Michael Tucker is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in this 19 civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 15, 2020, plaintiff filed a motion 20 requesting appointed of counsel. ECF No. 26. Plaintiff argues that that he lacks knowledge of 21 the law and needs to undergo physical therapy for a variety of injuries. Id. 22 Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, see Rand 23 v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court lacks the authority to require an 24 attorney to represent plaintiff, see Mallard v. U.S. District Court for the Southern District of 25 Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). The court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel. See 26 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1); Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. However, without a means to compensate 27 counsel, the court will seek volunteer counsel only in exceptional circumstances. In determining 28 whether such circumstances exist, “the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success wOOe 4:2 VERA MMU POO a Ee OY Oe 1 | onthe merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the 2 | complexity of the legal issues involved.” Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525 (internal quotation marks and 3 | citations omitted). 4 The court cannot conclude that exceptional circumstances requiring counsel are present 5 | here. The issues raised by the complaint are not unusually complicated and, at this stage in the 6 | proceedings, plaintiff has not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits or great 7 | difficulty articulating his claims. Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel 8 || is denied without prejudice. The court may revisit this issue at a later stage of the proceedings if 9 | justice so requires. 10 Wl IT IS SO ORDERED. \ prssanp Rae — Dated: _ April 16, 2020 13 UNIT#D STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 | No. 205. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28