Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01759/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01759-2/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TREMAYNE DEON CARROLL,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:16-cv-1759 TLN KJN P

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant 

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 21, 2016, the undersigned recommended that this action be 

dismissed based on plaintiff’s failure to file an in forma pauperis application. 

On September 22, 2016, plaintiff filed a request for an extension of time to file his in 

forma pauperis application. Good cause appearing, the findings and recommendations are 

vacated, and plaintiff is granted thirty days to file his in forma pauperis application.

Plaintiff also filed two separate requests for appointment of counsel. District courts lack 

authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section 1983 cases. Mallard v. 

United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional circumstances, the court may 

request an attorney to voluntarily represent such a plaintiff. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell 

v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 

(9th Cir. 1990). When determining whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, the court must 

Case 2:16-cv-01759-TLN-KJN Document 11 Filed 10/13/16 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

consider plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the plaintiff to 

articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Palmer v. 

Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (district court did not abuse discretion in declining to 

appoint counsel). The burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances is on the plaintiff. Id. 

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

access, do not establish exceptional circumstances that warrant a request for voluntary assistance 

of counsel. 

Having considered the factors under Palmer, the court finds that plaintiff has failed to 

meet his burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of 

counsel at this time.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The September 21, 2016 findings and recommendations (ECF No. 8) are vacated;

2. Plaintiff’s motion for extension of time (ECF No. 9) is granted; plaintiff is granted 

thirty days from the date of this order to file his application to proceed in forma pauperis; failure 

to file this application within that time will result in recommendation of dismissal of this action; 

3. Plaintiff’s motions for appointment of counsel (ECF Nos. 3, 9) are denied.

Dated: October 12, 2016

carr1759.36

Case 2:16-cv-01759-TLN-KJN Document 11 Filed 10/13/16 Page 2 of 2