Opinion
CASE NO. 3:18-CV-05573-RJB-DWC
09-14-2018
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S APPLICATION FOR COURT-APPOINTED COUNSEL
The District Court has referred this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action to United States Magistrate Judge David W. Christel. Currently pending in this action is Plaintiff Jerome Ceasar Alverto's Application for Court-Appointed Counsel. Dkt. 8.
No constitutional right to appointed counsel exists in a § 1983 action. Storseth v. Spellman, 654 F.2d 1349, 1353 (9th Cir. 1981); see United States v. $292,888.04 in U.S. Currency, 54 F.3d 564, 569 (9th Cir. 1995) ("[a]ppointment of counsel under this section is discretionary, not mandatory"). However, in "exceptional circumstances," a district court may appoint counsel for indigent civil litigants pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) (formerly 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d)). Rand v. Roland, 113F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), overruled on other grounds, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 1998). To decide whether exceptional circumstances exist, the Court must evaluate both "the likelihood of success on the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved." Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986) (quoting Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983)). A plaintiff must plead facts showing he has an insufficient grasp of his case or the legal issues involved and an inadequate ability to articulate the factual basis of his claims. Agyeman v. Corrections Corp. of America, 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004).
Plaintiff submitted an Application for Court-Appointed Counsel form, wherein he provided no reasons for why he is requesting Court-appointed counsel. See Dkt. 8. He states only that he has made efforts to retain counsel. See id. The Court notes his case does not involve complex facts or law, and Plaintiff has not shown an inability to articulate the factual basis of his claims in a fashion understandable to the Court. Plaintiff has also not shown he is likely to succeed on the merits of his case. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion (Dkt. 8) is denied without prejudice.
Dated this 14th day of September, 2018.
/s/_________
David W. Christel
United States Magistrate Judge