Opinion
No. 2:19-cv-2423-WBS-EFB P
07-06-2020
ROGELIO MAY RUIZ, Plaintiff, v. S. JOHNSTON, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He again requests that the court appoint counsel. ECF No. 11. He also requests a Spanish language interpreter. Id.
District courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional circumstances, the court may request an attorney to voluntarily represent such a plaintiff. See 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). When determining whether "exceptional circumstances" exist, the court must consider the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009). Having considered those factors, the court finds there are no exceptional circumstances in this case.
Plaintiff has also requested the assistance of a Spanish language interpreter. Thus far, plaintiff's pleadings have been in English and he has succeeded in effectively communicating with the court. Moreover, the court is not aware of any authority authorizing the expenditure of public funds for a court-appointed interpreter in a civil action. See Gonzalez v. Bopari, No. 1:12-cv-01053-LJO-GBC, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178295 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 17, 2012) (discussing lack of statutory authority for court to appoint interpreters in civil in forma pauperis actions).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's request for appointment of counsel and for a Spanish language interpreter (ECF No. 11) is denied without prejudice. DATED: July 6, 2020.
/s/_________
EDMUND F. BRENNAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE