Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-01250/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-01250-1/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRANK LEE DEARWESTER, No. 2:13-cv-1250-CMK-P

Plaintiff, 

vs. ORDER

EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., et al.

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42

U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff seeks the appointment of counsel. The United States Supreme Court

has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in

§ 1983 cases. See Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain

exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). See Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v.

Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). A finding of “exceptional

circumstances” requires an evaluation of both the likelihood of success on the merits and the

ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims on his own in light of the complexity of the legal

issues involved. See Terrell, 935 F.2d at 1017. Neither factor is dispositive and both must be

viewed together before reaching a decision. See id. 

1

Case 2:13-cv-01250-TLN-CMK Document 14 Filed 04/03/15 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

In the present case, the court does not at this time find the required exceptional

circumstances. Plaintiff has demonstrated sufficient writing ability and legal knowledge to

articulate his claim. Plaintiff is challenging the constitutionality of a California statute, and

appears sufficiently capable of articulating the issue, which does not appear to be overly

complex. In his motion, plaintiff states that he has limited legal knowledge, that his incarceration

will hinder his ability to litigate this case, and he cannot afford counsel. The court finds the

limitations insufficient to meet the “exceptional circumstances” requirement or establish that

plaintiff cannot articulate his claims without counsel. In addition, given the facts as alleged in

the complaint, it does not appear likely at this stage of the proceedings, that plaintiff will 

succeed on the merits. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s request for the

appointment of counsel (Doc. 12) is denied.

DATED: April 2, 2015

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 2:13-cv-01250-TLN-CMK Document 14 Filed 04/03/15 Page 2 of 2