Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-01340/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-01340-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LARRY E. TOMBS, No. 2:13-cv-1340-MCE-CMK-P

Plaintiff, 

vs. ORDER

JORDAN KEITH WALLACE,

Defendant.

 /

Plaintiff, a former state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court are plaintiff’s requests for leave to

proceed in forma pauperis (Docs. 6, 10). Plaintiff’s complaint, and service thereof by the United

States Marshal if appropriate, will be addressed separately. Plaintiff has submitted the affidavit

required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) showing that plaintiff is unable to prepay fees and costs or give

security therefor. His request will therefore be granted.1

Plaitniff has also filed a motion for the appointment of counsel (Doc. 9). The

United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to

As plaintiff is no longer incarcerated, no payment order will issue at this time. 1

1

Case 2:13-cv-01340-MCE-CMK Document 13 Filed 04/14/14 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. See Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S.

296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary

assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). See Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015,

1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). A finding

of “exceptional circumstances” requires an evaluation of both the likelihood of success on the

merits and the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims on his own in light of the complexity

of the legal issues involved. See Terrell, 935 F.2d at 1017. Neither factor is dispositive and both

must be viewed together before reaching a decision. See id. 

In the present case, the court does not at this time find the required exceptional

circumstances. First, the facts and law concerning plaintiff’s First and Eighth Amendment

claims are not overly complex. Second, the record demonstrates that plaintiff so far appears able

to articulate his claims on his own as his pleadings are legible and articulate. Third, at this early

state of the proceedings, the court cannot say that plaintiff has demonstrated any particular

likelihood of success on the merits.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that

1. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed informa pauperis (Docs. 6, 10) are

granted; and

2. Plaintiff’s request for the appointment of counsel (Doc. 9) is denied.

DATED: April 14, 2014

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 2:13-cv-01340-MCE-CMK Document 13 Filed 04/14/14 Page 2 of 2