Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00822/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00822-4/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff William Luna is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On June 22, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for the appointment of counsel. Plaintiff seeks 

appointment of counsel because his imprisonment limits his ability to litigate this action, he has 

limited access to the law library and limited knowledge of the law, and he will be required to attend 

and answer questions posed to him at a deposition hearing. 

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 any 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 (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.

WILLIAM LUNA,

 Plaintiff,

v.

MATTHEW CATE, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:13-cv-00822-SAB (PC)

ORDER DENYING, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT 

OF COUNSEL

[ECF No. 54]

Case 1:13-cv-00822-DAD-SAB Document 55 Filed 06/24/15 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

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 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. Even if it 

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. The Court finds Plaintiff’s reasons for 

requesting appointment of counsel indistinguishable from the reasons asserted by most prisoners. 

Circumstances common to most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library 

access do not present extraordinary circumstances that would warrant a request for voluntary 

assistance of counsel. In addition, this action is proceeding on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint 

against Defendants G. Stratton, J. Crabtree, S. Pina, J.C. Musselman, A. Pacillas, B. Banks-Graves, J. 

Ortega, and L. Wallace for a due process violation, and the issues in this case are not complex. 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: June 23, 2015 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00822-DAD-SAB Document 55 Filed 06/24/15 Page 2 of 2