Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01551/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01551-1/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 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BENJAMIN K. TOSCANO,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT 

OF CORRECTIONS AND 

REHABILITATION, et al.,

Defendants.

1:16-cv-01551-AWI-BAM (PC) 

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

FOR COUNSEL WITHOUT PREJUDICE

(ECF No. 13)

Plaintiff Benjamin K. Toscano (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the Court 

is Plaintiff’s second motion for the appointment of counsel filed on February 27, 2017. Plaintiff 

requests appointment of counsel because he cannot afford to employ an attorney. (ECF No. 13).

As Plaintiff was previously informed, 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. 

///

Case 1:16-cv-01551-AWI-BAM Document 14 Filed 03/02/17 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

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 

Aexceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success on

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).

In the present case, the Court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. 

Beyond an assertion that he is unable to afford counsel, Plaintiff has not identified any 

circumstances warranting appointment of counsel. 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. Plaintiff’s complaint has not been screened and there has been no 

finding that Plaintiff has stated cognizable claims. Additionally, based on a review of the record 

in this case, the Court does not find that Plaintiff cannot adequately articulate his claims. 

For these reasons, Plaintiff=s motion for the appointment of counsel is HEREBY 

DENIED, without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 1, 2017 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-01551-AWI-BAM Document 14 Filed 03/02/17 Page 2 of 2