(PC) Sanchez v. Johnson ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARIO SANCHEZ, Case No. 2:22-cv-00537-JDP (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 13 v. ECF No. 20 14 JOHNSON, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state inmate proceeding without counsel in this civil rights action brought 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He has filed a motion that request that he be appointed counsel. ECF 19 No. 20. 20 Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, see Rand 21 v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court lacks the authority to require an 22 attorney to represent plaintiff. See Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for the S. Dist. of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 23 298 (1989). The court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel. See 28 U.S.C. 24 § 1915(e)(1) (“The court may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford 25 counsel”); Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. However, without a means to compensate counsel, the court 26 will seek volunteer counsel only in exceptional circumstances. In determining whether such 27 circumstances exist, “the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success on the merits 28 [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the 1 | legal issues involved.” Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). 2 Plaintiff asks that be appointed counsel because he is housed in a mental health program 3 | and does not have the knowledge to represent himself. ECF No. 20. Plaintiff does not detail 4 | whether his impairment may limit his ability to articulate his claims. Additionally, plaintiff has 5 | thus far been able to successfully submit documents to the court, including a complaint, which 6 | detailed the factual and legal basis of his claims. Having considered these factors, the court does 7 | find not that there are exceptional circumstances warranting appointment of counsel. 8 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that plaintiff's motion, ECF No. 20, is denied 9 | without prejudice. 10 Wl IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 ( ie — Dated: _ November 1, 2022 Q_—_—. 13 JEREMY D. PETERSON 4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28