Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01948/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01948-0/pdf.json

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

27

28

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES PABLO PATTERSON,

Plaintiff,

vs.

WARDEN AND HOUSING SUPERVISOR,

Defendants. 

Case No. 1:12-cv-01948 JLT (PC)

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

APPOINT COUNSEL 

(Doc. 5)

On November 30, 2012, plaintiff filed a motion seeking the appointment of counsel. 

(Doc. 5). Plaintiff alleges he was in special education classes in school and has trouble reading 

and writing. (Doc. 5 at 2) Plaintiff reports that he would have to use the services of a jailhouse 

lawyer, but is unable to afford the fee charged. Id. He reports also that he has attempted to obtain 

the services of a lawyer but to no avail. Id. at 2-3.

Despite these representations, attached to his complaint are numerous documents 

demonstrating that Plaintiff does have the capability of articulating his claims in writing. (Doc. 1 

at 14-20, 26-28, 34) Moreover, despite his claims that he has trouble reading, the documents 

demonstrate that he has basic skills and repeatedly submitted written documents in various 

grievances in the prison. Id. Moreover, though Plaintiff was in special education classes in 

school, he completed the 12th grade, though was required to repeat it. Id. at 29. Finally, when 

Case 1:12-cv-01948-DAD-JLT Document 7 Filed 12/10/12 Page 1 of 3
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

27

28

2

presenting his grievance to the prison, officials there determined that, “Your reading level is 

above 4.0 (6.2) and you will not require special accommodation to achieve effective 

communication.” Doc. 1 at 24. Also, when he was charged with a rules violation related to the 

events which give rise to this lawsuit, prison officials documented, 

Effective communication was established with inmate PATTERSON, at the

beginning of the hearing by his reading aloud the first two sentences of the charges 

which were documented in the circumstances section of the RVR, then verbalizing 

to this SHO what he read and the fact that he understood the charges as written. At 

the end of the hearing, PA TTERSON stated he understood the findings reached

and did not have any questions, Inmate PATTERSON explained to this SHO his 

understanding of the charges/ process / options / and instructions to this SHO’s 

satisfaction.

STAFF ASSISTANT ASSIGNMENT: Inmate PATTERSON's TABE score is 

above 4.0; he does speak English, is literate, the issues are not complex, and a 

confidential relationship is not required. Assistance is not necessary to ensure the 

inmate comprehends the nature of the charges or the disciplinary process.

Id. at 36. Finally, the fact that Plaintiff feels he is not prepared to present his case is not unusual 

with litigants, including those who are not in prison.

In any event, Plaintiff is advised that he does not have a constitutional right to appointed 

counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court 

cannot require an attorney to represent plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. 

United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298, 109 S.Ct. 1814, 

1816 (1989). However, in certain exceptional circumstances the court may request the voluntary 

assistance of counsel pursuant to section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. 

Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the court will seek 

volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether 

“exceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success of 

the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the 

complexity of the legal issues involved.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).

Based upon the analysis set forth above, the Court does not find the required exceptional 

circumstances exist in this case. Even if it is assumed that Plaintiff is not well versed in the law 

and that he has made serious allegations which, if proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is 

not exceptional. This Court is faced with similar cases almost daily. Further, at this early stage in 

Case 1:12-cv-01948-DAD-JLT Document 7 Filed 12/10/12 Page 2 of 3
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

27

28

3

the proceedings, the Court cannot determine whether Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits. 

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for

appointment of counsel is DENIED, without prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 7, 2012 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END:

9j7khijed

Case 1:12-cv-01948-DAD-JLT Document 7 Filed 12/10/12 Page 3 of 3