(PC) Lewis v. Welsh ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TYRONE LEWIS, Case No. 1:19-cv-01468-EPG (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 13 FOR APPOINTMENT OF PRO BONO v. COUNSEL, WITHOUT PREJUDICE 14 WELSH, et al., (ECF NO. 14) 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Tyrone Lewis (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 19 this action. 20 On May 5, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of pro bono counsel. (ECF No. 21 14). Plaintiff asks for appointment of counsel because he is unable to afford counsel; because his 22 imprisonment will greatly limit his ability to litigate; because the issues involved in this case are 23 complex; because Plaintiff has limited access to the law library due to COVID-19 restrictions; 24 because Plaintiff has limited knowledge of the law; and because a trial in this case will likely 25 involve conflicting testimony and counsel would better enable Plaintiff to present evidence and 26 cross examine witnesses. 27 Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. 28 Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), withdrawn in part on other grounds, 154 F.3d 952 4:40 UV VETO NS MMIC Aw PI ee YY ev 1 | (9th Cir. 1998), and the Court cannot require an attorney to represent Plaintiff pursuant to 28 21 US.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 3 | 490 US. 296, 298 (1989). However, in certain exceptional circumstances the Court may request 4 | the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. 5 Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the Court will seek 6 | volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether 7 | “exceptional circumstances exist, a district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success of 8 | the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the 9 | complexity of the legal issues involved.” Id. (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). 10 The Court will not order appointment of pro bono counsel at this time. The Court has 11 || reviewed the record in this case, and at this time the Court is unable to make a determination that 12 | Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits of his claims. Moreover, it appears that Plaintiff can 13 | adequately articulate his claims. 14 If Plaintiff needs additional time to respond to a deadline due to COVID-19 restrictions, 15 | he may file a motion for an extension of that deadline. 16 Plaintiff is advised that he is not precluded from renewing his motion for appointment of 17 | pro bono counsel at a later stage of the proceedings. 18 For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for appointment of pro 19 | bono counsel is DENIED without prejudice. 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 | Dated: _ May 6, 2020 [Je hey 73 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 24 25 26 27 28