Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-01935/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-01935-4/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

ALONZO JOSEPH, No. 2:12-CV-1935-CMK-P

Plaintiff, 

vs. ORDER

C. SMITH, 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 (Doc. 14). 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

1

Case 2:12-cv-01935-CMK Document 15 Filed 02/05/14 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

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. 

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

circumstances. First, the court notes that plaintiff’s complaint is well-written and wellorganized. Second, the issues presented in the complaint – whether defendants violated

plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment rights – are not overly complex. In light of the relative low

complexity of the issues involved, the court finds at this time that plaintiff is able to articulate his

claims on his own. Finally, the court cannot say at this early stage of the proceedings that

plaintiff has a likelihood of success on the merits. For all these reasons, the required exceptional

circumstances to do not exist. Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel will be denied. 

Plaintiff’s amended complaint will be addressed separately. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for appointment

of counsel (Doc. 14) is denied. 

DATED: February 4, 2014

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 2:12-cv-01935-CMK Document 15 Filed 02/05/14 Page 2 of 2