Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00902/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00902-0/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OLIVER GRAY,

 Plaintiff,

v.

C. FLORES, et al.,

 Defendants.

Case No. 1:20-cv-00902-JDP

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 

ECF No. 6

Plaintiff Oliver Gray is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in this civil rights 

action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 13, 2020, before the case was transferred to this 

division, plaintiff filed a motion requesting appointed of counsel. ECF No. 6. Plaintiff submits 

that he suffers from neurological and psychological issues and cannot afford counsel. Id.

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v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), withdrawn in part on other grounds on reh’g en 

banc, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 1998), and the court lacks the authority to require an attorney to 

represent plaintiff, see Mallard v. U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 

296, 298 (1989). This court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel. See 28 U.S.C. § 

1915(e)(1); Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. However, without a means to compensate counsel, the court 

Case 1:20-cv-00902-JLT-HBK Document 12 Filed 07/01/20 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

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 

[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).

The court cannot conclude that exceptional circumstances requiring the appointment of counsel 

are present here. At this stage in the proceedings, plaintiff has not demonstrated a likelihood of 

success on the merits, and the issues covered in his complaint do not appear unusually complex. 

Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel, ECF No. 6, is denied 

without prejudice. The court may revisit this issue at a later stage of the proceedings if the 

interests of justice so require. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 30, 2020 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

No. 205.

Case 1:20-cv-00902-JLT-HBK Document 12 Filed 07/01/20 Page 2 of 2