(PS) United States of America v. Torrance ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 2:18-cv-1631-JAM-EFB PS 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 BRIAN TORRANCE 15 Respondent. 16 17 The United States filed this action seeking to enforce an IRS summons served on 18 respondent Brian Torrance. ECF No. 1. The court previously denied respondent’s request for 19 appointment of counsel, finding that he failed to demonstrate that appointing counsel was 20 appropriate. Respondent now renews his request for appointment of counsel. 21 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), a court may appoint counsel to represent an indigent 22 civil litigant in certain exceptional circumstances. See Agyeman v. Corrections Corp. of America, 23 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004); Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); 24 Richards v. Harper, 864 F.2d 85, 87 (9th Cir. 1988). In considering whether exceptional 25 circumstances exist, the court must evaluate (1) the petitioner’s likelihood of success on the 26 merits and (2) the ability of the petitioner to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity 27 of the legal issues involved. Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (1991). 28 ///// wOAOe VV EVV LOY EAINI RAT MAURO Sr POO ee OY ee 1 Respondent argues appointing counsel is appropriate because the government has falsified 2 | records related to his tax liabilities. ECF No. 49 at 1-2. He further argues that counsel is 3 || necessary to help him establish that this court lacks jurisdiction over this case. Id. at 3-4. 4 As a threshold matter, respondent has failed to demonstrate that he is unable to afford an 5 || attorney. More significantly, he has failed to show that exceptional circumstances warrant the 6 || appointment of counsel. This action does not involve novel or complex issues. Instead, the 7 || government’s petition only seeks to compel respondent to provide testimony and documents 8 || needed to determine and collect the tax liability for certain years. Further, respondent’ □ 9 | likelihood of success or the degree of respondent’s ability to articulate his arguments do not 10 || amount to exceptional circumstances justifying the appointment of counsel. Respondent has 11 | demonstrated no difficulty articulating his position in his multiple filings. The court also 12 || explained to respondent, on multiple occasions, that it has jurisdiction over this action. See ECF 13 | Nos. 20, 25, 28, 38. Lastly, respondent argument that purported falsified his tax records is 14 | unavailing. The government specifically seeks information to assess his tax liabilities, and 15 || respondent has not shown that the purported fraud prevents him from providing such information. 16 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that respondent’s request for appointment of 17 || counsel (ECF No. 49) is denied. 18 | DATED: September 21, 2020. Yr b; / Z “Oh 5 19 EDMUND F. BRENNAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28