Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01340/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01340-15/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 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GARRISON S. JOHNSON, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

 )

v. ) 

)

RODERICK HICKMAN, et al., )

 )

)

Defendants. )

____________________________________)

1:05-CV-01340 AWI LJO P 

 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 

(DOCUMENT #37, 38)

On August 31, 2006 and September 5, 2006, plaintiff filed motions seeking the

appointment of counsel. Plaintiff 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]

Case 1:05-cv-01340-LJO-GSA Document 39 Filed 09/26/06 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 2

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).

In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. 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 the proceedings, the court cannot make a determination that

plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits, and based on a review of the record in this case, the court does

not find that plaintiff cannot adequately articulate his claims. Id. 

For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel is HEREBY

DENIED, without prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 26, 2006 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

i0d3h8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01340-LJO-GSA Document 39 Filed 09/26/06 Page 2 of 2