Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00307/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00307-28/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SHELDON RAY NEWSOME,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. LOTERZSTAIN, et al., 

Defendants.

Case No. 2:19-cv-00307-DAD-JDP (PC)

ORDER 

Plaintiff is a state inmate proceeding without counsel in this civil rights action brought 

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff moves for the appointment of counsel. ECF No. 145. 

Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, see Rand 

v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court lacks the authority to require an 

attorney to represent plaintiff. See Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for the S. Dist. of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 

298 (1989). The court can request the voluntary assistance of counsel. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(e)(1) (“The court may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford 

counsel”); Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. But without a means to compensate counsel, the court will 

seek volunteer counsel only in exceptional circumstances. In determining whether such 

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

Case 2:19-cv-00307-DAD-JDP Document 149 Filed 09/18/23 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

[and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the 

legal issues involved.” Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).

Plaintiff moves for the appointment of counsel due to his “medical conditions, low grade 

point average, and inability to articulate the case, [and] lack of help in the library.” ECF No. 145 

at 1. The allegations in the complaint are not exceptionally complicated, and plaintiff has not 

demonstrated that he is likely to succeed on the merits. Plaintiff has not demonstrated 

exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of counsel. Indeed, the challenges

plaintiff identified are unfortunately common to many prisoners. 

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of 

counsel, ECF No. 145, is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 17, 2023 

JEREMY D. PETERSON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:19-cv-00307-DAD-JDP Document 149 Filed 09/18/23 Page 2 of 2