Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00468/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00468-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
California Correctional Institution
Defendant
Willie Weaver
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

WILLIE WEAVER,

Plaintiff,

v.

CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL

INSTITUTION CONFINEMENT

SHU, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:06-CV-00468-OWW-SMS-P

Appeal No. 06-16346

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS

FOR TRANSCRIPTS ON APPEAL AT

GOVERNMENT EXPENSE AND FOR THE

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

(Docs. 11, 12, and 13)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK’S OFFICE TO

SERVE COPY OF ORDER ON NINTH

CIRCUIT

Plaintiff Willie Weaver (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner who was proceeding pro se in this civil

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on April 21, 2006. (Doc. 1.)

Because the complaint in this action sets forth the same claims as those set forth in the complaint

filed on April 17, 2006, in case number 1:06-CV-00442-AWI-SMS-P, by order filed June 27, 2006,

the Court dismissed this action as duplicative of case number 1:06-CV-00442-AWI-SMS-P. (Doc.

6.) Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal on July 10, 2006. (Doc. 8.) On August 3, 2006, plaintiff filed

a motion seeking transcripts at government expense and a motion seeking the appointment of

counsel. (Docs. 11, 12, 13,)

Plaintiff seeks transcripts on appeal at government expense. Because there have been no

courtroom proceedings in this action, the Court construes plaintiff’s motion to be one for the printing

of the record at government expense. Plaintiff was not proceeding in forma pauperis in this action

Case 1:06-cv-00468-OWW -SMS Document 16 Filed 08/18/06 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

in the district court. Therefore, plaintiff is not entitled to printing of the record at government

expense. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(c). Further, in a separate order issued concurrently with this order, the

Court found that plaintiff’s appeal was not taken in good faith and denied plaintiff’s motion for leave

to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. For these reasons, plaintiff’s motion shall be denied. In the

event that the Ninth Circuit deems it necessary to review the record and directs this Court to produce

it, the Court will do so. Absent instruction from the Ninth Circuit, however, the record will not be

printed for plaintiff at government expense. 

Plaintiff also seeks the appointment of counsel. Plaintiff’s motion is best directed to the

Ninth Circuit. However, in light of the fact that plaintiff filed his motion in the district court, this

Court will address it.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require

counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States District Court for

the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298, 109 S.Ct. 1814, 1816 (1989). In certain

exceptional circumstances, the Court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997). Without a reasonable

method of securing and compensating counsel, this Court will seek volunteer counsel only in the

most serious and exceptional cases. 

In the present case, the Court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. See id.

This action was dismissed as duplicative of another pending case and in the Court has found that

plaintiff’s appeal of the dismissal was not taken in good faith. Therefore, plaintiff's request for the

appointment of counsel shall be denied.

In accordance with the above, plaintiff’s motion for transcripts on appeal, construed as one

for the printing of the record on appeal at government expense, and plaintiff’s motion for the

appointment of counsel on appeal, filed August 3, 2006, are HEREBY DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 17, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00468-OWW -SMS Document 16 Filed 08/18/06 Page 2 of 2