(PC) Coleman v. Spearman ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 RODNEY V. COLEMAN, No. 2:19-cv-0369 AC P 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER 13 M.E. SPEARMAN, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action, has requested 17 appointment of counsel. ECF No. 30. In support of his request, plaintiff states in part that he is 18 incarcerated; that he has health issues that make it difficult for him to respond to the court’s 19 orders at times; that his case may require complex investigation; and that he has limited access to 20 the prison law library. Id. 21 The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require 22 counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 23 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the district court may request the 24 voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 25 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). 26 The test for exceptional circumstances requires the court to evaluate the plaintiff’s 27 likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in 28 light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. See Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1 | 1331 (9th Cir. 1986); Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). Circumstances 2 || common to most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not 3 || establish exceptional circumstances that would warrant a request for voluntary assistance of 4 | counsel. 5 The court notes that plaintiff has adequately managed this matter to date. The complaint 6 || presents one viable claim against one defendant. Additionally, plaintiff fails to state with any 7 || specificity what investigation is necessary and why it will be complicated. Finally, to the extent 8 | plaintiff currently has limited access to the prison law library, this is a relatively common 9 || occurrence that does not warrant the appointment of counsel. Plaintiff may seek the extension of 10 || any deadlines that he has difficulty meeting. For these reasons, the court does not find the 11 || required exceptional circumstances. 12 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for the appointment of 13 || counsel (ECF No. 30) is DENIED. 14 | DATED: April 18, 2022 ~ 16 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28