Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-00225/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-00225-6/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 06cv225 WQH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FELIPE GARCIA,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. GRIMM, et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 06cv225 WQH (PCL)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF

COUNSEL (Doc. No. 110.)

Plaintiff requests the Court appoint counsel because he suffers from a “psychological condition

[that is] a hinderance [sic] to continu[ing] the litigation of the present case due to [his] mental state,

compiled with stress, headaches, paranoia; [sic] forgetfullness; [sic]” (Doc. No. 10 at 2.) Plaintiff

requires counsel, he continues, “because if I continue to have to listen to these tapes, and read these

reports; [sic] It might trigger my anger and show of [sic] what of [sic] I am capable of...” (Id. at 3.)

Nonetheless, a plaintiff is not entitled to counsel, even if he is mentally fragile. As the Court has

told Plaintiff on a number of occasions, “it is well-settled that there is generally no constitutional right to

counsel in civil cases.” United States v. Sardone, 94 F.3d 1233, 1236 (9th Cir.1996) (internal citation

omitted). Rather, district courts have discretion, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.1915(e)(1), to request that an

attorney represent indigent civil litigants upon a showing of exceptional circumstances. See Agyeman v.

Corrs. Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 1101, 1003 (9th Cir.2004). “A finding of the exceptional circumstances

Case 3:06-cv-00225-CAB-PCL Document 111 Filed 02/28/08 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 06cv225 WQH

of the plaintiff seeking assistance requires at least an evaluation of the likelihood of the plaintiff’s

success on the merits...” Id. 

Plaintiff has prosecuted his case so far without the assistance of counsel. Moreover, he is unlikely

to win on the merits of the case – he seemingly has little evidence to substantiate his claims. (See Doc.

No. 90.) Thus, Plaintiff has still failed to demonstrate “extraordinary circumstances” justifying

appointment of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED. If Plaintiff

can no longer proceed as he has claimed, (Doc. No. 110), he should file a motion to dismiss the action

voluntarily.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: February 27, 2008 

Peter C. Lewis

U.S. Magistrate Judge

United States District Court

cc: The Honorable William Q. Hayes

 All Counsel of Record

Case 3:06-cv-00225-CAB-PCL Document 111 Filed 02/28/08 Page 2 of 2