(PC) Miller v. Montgomery ( 2023 )


Menu:
  • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ELIJAH LEE MILLER, No. 2:23-CV-0994-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 ANDREW MONTGOMERY, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel, 19 ECF No. 12. 20 The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to 21 require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. See Mallard v. United States Dist. 22 Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the Court may request the 23 voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). See Terrell v. Brewer, 935 24 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). 25 A finding of “exceptional circumstances” requires an evaluation of both the likelihood of success 26 on the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims on his own in light of the 27 complexity of the legal issues involved. See Terrell, 935 F.2d at 1017. Neither factor is 28 dispositive and both must be viewed together before reaching a decision. See id. In Terrell, the 1 | Ninth Circuit concluded the district court did not abuse its discretion with respect to appointment 2 | of counsel because: 3 ... Terrell demonstrated sufficient writing ability and legal knowledge to articulate his claim. The facts he alleged and the issues he raised were not 4 of substantial complexity. The compelling evidence against Terrell made it 5 extremely unlikely that he would succeed on the merits. ‘ Id. at 1017. 7 In the present case, the Court does not at this time find the required exceptional 8 | circumstances. Plaintiff states that appointment of counsel is warranted because: (1) she has a 9 || mental disability resulting in borderline intellectual functioning; (2) she is uneducated; and (3) 10 || she cannot locate an attorney to represent her. As to the alleged mental disability, Plaintiff has 11 | not described the limitations resulting from her condition, nor provided any documentation 12 || establishing any limitations. In this regard, and despite the claimed mental disability, Plaintiffs 13 || filings to date indicate that she is capable of sufficiently articulating her claims and 14 | communicating with the Court. Further, Plaintiff's lack of education and inability to locate 15 || counsel willing to take her case are typical circumstances for prisoners pursuing litigation in 16 || federal court. Finally, at this early stage of the proceedings before the Court has screened 17 | Plaintiff's complaint, the Court is unable to find that Plaintiffs has established a likelihood of 18 || success on the merits or that the claims involved are overly complex factually or legally. 19 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's request for the 20 || appointment of counsel, ECF No. 12, is denied. 21 22 || Dated: September 1, 2023 = IS Co 23 DENNIS M. COTA 4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 25 26 27 28

Document Info

Docket Number: 2:23-cv-00994

Filed Date: 9/1/2023

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 6/20/2024