Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-02126/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-02126-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Boy White, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Director Charles Ryan, et al.,

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 11-2126-PHX-GMS

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Petitioner’s Response to Order (Doc. 25) requesting

additional time to file an objection to the R&R and request for appointment of counsel. The

Court will treat the Response as a Motion to Extend and Motion for Appointment of Counsel.

There is no constitutional right to appointed counsel in a civil case. See Ivey v. Bd.

of Regents of Univ. of Alaska, 673 F.2d 266, 269 (9th Cir. 1982). The Court, however, does

have the discretion to appoint counsel in “exceptional circumstances.” See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(1); Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986); Aldabe v. Aldabe,

616 F.2d 1089, 1093 (9th Cir. 1980). “A finding of exceptional circumstances requires an

evaluation of both ‘the likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of the petitioner to

articulate his or her claim pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.’”

Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331(quoting Weygant v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983)); see

Richards v. Harper, 864 F.2d 85, 87 (9th Cir. 1988). “Neither of these factors is dispositive

and both must be viewed together before reaching a decision on request of counsel” under

section 1915(e)(1). Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331.

Case 2:11-cv-02126-GMS Document 27 Filed 03/05/12 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 -

Having considered both factors, the Court finds that Petitioner has not demonstrated

a likelihood of success on the merits or that any difficulty he is experiencing in attempting

to litigate his case is due to the complexity of the issues involved. While Plaintiff has

pointed to difficulties that he is experiencing, such difficulties do not make his case

exceptional. Accordingly, at the present time, this case does not present “exceptional

circumstances” requiring the appointment of counsel. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED granting Petitioner’s request for additional time to file a response

to the R&R, to and including, March 19, 2012.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Petitioner’s request for appointment of

counsel.

DATED this 5th day of March, 2012.

Case 2:11-cv-02126-GMS Document 27 Filed 03/05/12 Page 2 of 2