Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cv-00446/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cv-00446-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

 1On the docket, the Clerk of the Court entered the Motion as a “Motion for Sanctions

against Former Counsel.” Although Mr. De Leon makes some serious character

aspersions regarding Mr. Montoya, his former counsel, in the Motion, he has not asked

for sanctions. The Court therefore will not treat the motion as one for sanctions.

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Albert DeLeon,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

Dora Schriro, et al,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CV-04-446-PHX-JAT

ORDER

On August 29, 2007, the Court permitted counsel for Plaintiff to withdraw. Thus,

Plaintiff Mr. De Leon is now proceeding pro se. On September 19, Mr. De Leon filed a

motion styled, “Motion for Malicious Prosecution by Former Counsel. Plaintiff is

Respectfully Requesting For This Court to Appoint an Attorney for Him.” (Doc. # 256). Mr.

De Leon is the Plaintiff in this civil action. He therefore does not have a case for “malicious

prosecution.”1

 

The only request for relief that Mr. De Leon makes in the Motion is for appointment

of counsel. The Court therefore will treat the Motion as one for appointment of counsel. Mr.

De Leon asks this Court to appoint trial counsel for him given his ignorance of the law.

There is no constitutional right to appointment of counsel in a civil case for constitutional

Case 2:04-cv-00446-JAT Document 257 Filed 09/20/07 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 -

violations. See Campbell v. Burt, 141 F.3d 927, 931 (9th Cir. 1998). But the Court may

appoint counsel in a civil rights case when exceptional circumstances exist. 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 claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues

involved.’” Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986)(quoting Weygandt

v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983)).

Mr. De Leon requests that the Court appoint counsel because of his ignorance of the

law. Mr. De Leon’s “ignorance of the law” does not make him any different from most pro

se plaintiffs. In his Motion, Mr. De Leon has not articulated exceptional circumstances that

would require appointment of counsel in this case. Further, he has demonstrated an ability

to express himself before the Court. The Court therefore denies Mr. De Leon’s motion for

appointment of counsel.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED DENYING Plaintiff’s “Motion for Malicious

Prosecution by Former Counsel. Plaintiff is Respectfully Requesting For This Court to

Appoint an Attorney for Him” (Doc. # 256). 

DATED this 20th day of September, 2007.

Case 2:04-cv-00446-JAT Document 257 Filed 09/20/07 Page 2 of 2