Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05880/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05880-3/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

JEFFREY M. DANIELS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

 )

v. ) 

)

J. MARSHALL, et al., )

 )

)

Defendants. )

____________________________________)

1:02-CV-5880 AWI SMS P 

 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 

(DOCUMENT #79)

Plaintiff Jeffrey M. Daniels (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 1, 2006, plaintiff filed a

motion seeking the appointment of counsel.

The court cannot require an attorney to represent plaintiff. Mallard v. United States District

Courtfor the Southern District of Iowa, 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). Terrell

v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991). Without a reasonable method of securing and

compensating counsel, this court will seek volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional

cases. “A finding of exceptional circumstances requires an evaluation of both ‘the likelihood of success

///

Case 1:02-cv-05880-AWI -SMS Document 82 Filed 03/06/06 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

of the merits and the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of

the legal issues involved.’” Terrell, 935 F.2d at 1017 (citations omitted).

In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Even if it is

assumed that plaintiff is not well versed in the law and that he has made serious allegations which, if

proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is not exceptional. This court is faced with similar cases

almost daily. Further, at this stage in the proceedings, the court cannot make a determination that

plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits, and based on a review of the record in this case, the court does

not find that plaintiff cannot adequately articulate his claims. Terrell, 935 F.2d at 1017. 

For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel, filed February 1,

2006, is HEREBY DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 6, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

i0d3h8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:02-cv-05880-AWI -SMS Document 82 Filed 03/06/06 Page 2 of 2