Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00703/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00703-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LEWIS FORBES, et al., No. CIV S-07-0703-FCD-CMK-P

Plaintiffs, 

vs. ORDER

SACRAMENTO POLICE 

DEPARTMENT, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff Lewis Forbes, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Co-plaintiff Sarah Rochon, plaintiff Forbes’ wife, is not

incarcerated. Pending before the court is plaintiffs’ motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. 8),

filed on May 21, 2007. 

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

require counsel to 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

Case 2:07-cv-00703-FCD-CMK Document 9 Filed 05/25/07 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

2

(9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the court does not at this time find the required exceptional

circumstances. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs’ request for the

appointment of counsel is denied.

DATED: May 23, 2007.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:07-cv-00703-FCD-CMK Document 9 Filed 05/25/07 Page 2 of 2