Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-02318/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-02318-1/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

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Jowell Finley,

Plaintiff,

v.

A. De La Trinidad et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 11cv2318 JLS (PCL)

ORDER DENYING MOTION

FOR APPOINTMENT OF

COUNSEL (Doc. 17);

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT

MOTION FOR PRETRIAL

CONFERENCE (Doc. 20); AND

ORDER GRANTING MOTION

FOR COPY OF LOCAL RULES

(Doc. 21). 

MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

Plaintiff Jowell Finley is a state prisoner proceeding pro se pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

(Doc. 1.) Plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1).

(Doc. 17.)

Section 1915(e)(1) provides that “[t]he court may request an attorney to represent any

person unable to afford counsel.” However, the court may appoint counsel under Section

1915(e) only under “exceptional circumstances.” Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331

(9th Cir. 1986) (citation omitted). “A finding of exceptional circumstances requires an

evaluation of both the likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of the petitioner to

articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Neither of

Case 3:11-cv-02318-JLS-PCL Document 23 Filed 04/03/12 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

27

28

11cv2318 JLS

2

these factors is dispositive and both must be viewed together before reaching a decision on

request of counsel under section 1915[e].” Id. (citations and internal quotations omitted).

Here, Plaintiff argues that he is entitled to appointed counsel because he is indigent and

he has only a high school education without a proficient grasp of the laws involved in his case. 

(Doc. 17, at 1-3.) However, these reasons do not amount to exceptional circumstances entitling

Plaintiff to a court-appointed attorney. Thus, Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel is

DENIED without prejudice.

MOTION FOR PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

Plaintiff filed a motion for pretrial conference. (Doc. 20.) However, the motion is

DENIED as moot. The Court has already set a Case Management Conference set for April 24,

2012 at 10:00 a.m.

MOTION FOR COPY OF LOCAL RULES

Plaintiff filed a motion for a copy of the local rules. (Doc. 21.) The Court hereby

GRANTS the motion. The Clerk of the Court is ordered to send Plaintiff a copy of the local

rules. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATE: April 3, 2012 

 

Peter C. Lewis

U.S. Magistrate Judge

United States District Court

cc: The Honorable Sammartino

All Parties and Counsel of Record

Case 3:11-cv-02318-JLS-PCL Document 23 Filed 04/03/12 Page 2 of 2