(PC) Onley v. Davis ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RONNIE FRANKLIN ONLEY, No. 2:22-cv-01795-WBS-EFB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 D. DAVIS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 19 U.S.C. § 1983. He requests that the court appoint counsel. District courts lack authority to 20 require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States 21 Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional circumstances, the court may request an 22 attorney to voluntarily to represent such a plaintiff. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1); Terrell v. 23 Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th 24 Cir. 1990). When determining whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, the court must 25 consider the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the plaintiff to articulate 26 his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 27 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009). Having considered those factors, the court finds there are no 28 1 || exceptional circumstances in this case. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s request for appointment of 3 | counsel (ECF No. 40) is denied. 5 | DATED: November 17, 2023 Zo 1 Whig’ LZ2A0ELNeR EDMUND F. BRENNAN 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28