From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

King v. Bosenko

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 30, 2013
No. 2:12-cv-2940 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 30, 2013)

Opinion

No. 2:12-cv-2940 CKD P

01-30-2013

JESSE JAMES KING, Plaintiff, v. TOM BOSENKO, et al.. Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff has filed a second request for the appointment of counsel. 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 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). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel will therefore be denied.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel (Dkt No. 20) is denied.

______________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

King v. Bosenko

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 30, 2013
No. 2:12-cv-2940 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 30, 2013)
Case details for

King v. Bosenko

Case Details

Full title:JESSE JAMES KING, Plaintiff, v. TOM BOSENKO, et al.. Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 30, 2013

Citations

No. 2:12-cv-2940 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 30, 2013)