Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-01622/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-01622-0/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 

27 

28 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Johnny G. Woods, Jr., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Joseph M. Arpaio, Maricopa County 

Sheriff; Lourdes Hernandez; Dr. Gaskins; 

Does 1-50; County of Maricopa, 

Defendants.

No. CV-13-01622-PHX-GMS

ORDER 

 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Pro Bono Program (Doc. 6) 

which the Court will treat as a motion for appointment of counsel. 

 There is no constitutional right to appointed counsel in a civil case. See Ivey v. Bd. 

of Regents of Univ. of Alaska, 673 F.2d 266, 269 (9th Cir. 1982). The Court, however, 

does have the discretion to appoint counsel in “exceptional circumstances.” See 28 

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1); Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986); Aldabe 

v. Aldabe, 616 F.2d 1089, 1093 (9th Cir. 1980). “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 or her claim pro se in light of the complexity of the legal 

issues involved.’” Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331(quoting Weygant v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 

954 (9th Cir. 1983)); see Richards v. Harper, 864 F.2d 85, 87 (9th Cir. 1988). “Neither 

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

decision on request of counsel” under section 1915(e)(1). Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331. 

Case 2:13-cv-01622-JJT Document 9 Filed 09/05/13 Page 1 of 2
- 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 

 Having considered both factors, the Court finds that Plaintiff has not demonstrated 

a likelihood of success on the merits or that any difficulty he may be experiencing in 

attempting to litigate his case is due to the complexity of the issues involved. While 

Plaintiff may have financial difficulties that he may be experiencing, such difficulties do 

not make his case exceptional. Accordingly, at the present time, this case does not 

present “exceptional circumstances” requiring the appointment of counsel. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is denied. 

 Dated this 5th day of September, 2013. 

Case 2:13-cv-01622-JJT Document 9 Filed 09/05/13 Page 2 of 2