Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00818/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00818-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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 11CV221 BTM(WVG)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL BRASWELL,

Plaintiff,

Case No. 11cv221 BTM(WVG)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS,

DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL, AND

DISMISSING COMPLAINT FOR

FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

v.

YUMA COUNTY DETENTION CENTER,

Defendant.

On February 2, 2011, Plaintiff filed a Complaint, a Motion to Proceed In Forma

Pauperis (“IFP Motion”), and a Motion for Appointment of Counsel. For the reasons

discussed below, the IFP Motion is granted, the Complaint is dismissed with leave to amend,

and the Motion for Appointment of Counsel is denied without prejudice.

DISCUSSION

I. Motion to Proceed IFP

Upon review of Plaintiff’s affidavit in support of his IFP Motion, the Court finds that

Plaintiff has made a sufficient showing of inability to pay the filing fees required to prosecute

this action. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s IFP Motion is GRANTED. 

///

///

Case 2:11-cv-00818-JAT Document 4 Filed 02/11/11 Page 1 of 3
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 11CV221 BTM(WVG)

II. Failure to State a Claim

Although the Court will allow Plaintiff to proceed IFP, Plaintiff’s Complaint must be

dismissed for failure to state a claim. The Court is under a continuing duty to dismiss an IFP

case whenever the Court determines that the action “fails to state a claim on which relief may

be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

In his Complaint, it appears that Plaintiff alleges that he was falsely arrested in

November, 2009, and that he somehow suffered some sort of injury and ended up in the

hospital. The Complaint does not name as a defendant the law enforcement agency that

affected his arrest. The only defendant Plaintiff names is “Yuma County Detention Center.”

It is unclear what role Yuma County Detention Center played in the events underlying

Plaintiff’s Complaint. As for the “bodily injury” Plaintiff sustained, Plaintiff does not provide

any facts regarding how he sustained the injury and who, if anyone, inflicted or exacerbated

it. Finally, the Court questions whether the Southern District of California is the proper venue

for this suit. Because Plaintiff names Yuma County Detention Center as a defendant, the

Court has reason to believe that the events giving rise to Plaintiff’s complaint occurred in

Arizona. 

For all of the reasons discussed above, the Court dismisses Plaintiff’s Complaint for

failure to state a claim. However, the Court grants Plaintiff leave to file an amended

complaint that corrects the above-noted deficiencies. If Plaintiff wishes to file an amended

complaint, he must do so on or before March 7, 2011. Failure to do so will result in the

closing of this case. 

III. Appointment of Counsel

There is no right to counsel in civil cases, and district courts may appoint counsel only

under “exceptional circumstances.” Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991).

“A finding of exceptional circumstances requires an evaluation of both ‘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.’ Neither of these issues is dispositive and both must

Case 2:11-cv-00818-JAT Document 4 Filed 02/11/11 Page 2 of 3
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

3 11CV221 BTM(WVG)

be viewed together before reaching a decision.” Id. 

At this point in time, the Court cannot say that there is any likelihood of success on

the merits. Therefore, the Court DENIES without prejudice Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment

of Counsel. 

CONCLUSION

Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP is GRANTED. However, Plaintiff’s Complaint is

DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

Plaintiff may file a First Amended Complaint on or before March 7, 2011. If Plaintiff fails to

do so, the Court shall close this case. Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel is

DENIED without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: February 11, 2011

Honorable Barry Ted Moskowitz

United States District Judge

Case 2:11-cv-00818-JAT Document 4 Filed 02/11/11 Page 3 of 3