From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Childs v. State

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 31, 2017
No. 2:13-cv-670-TLN-EFB P (E.D. Cal. May. 31, 2017)

Opinion

No. 2:13-cv-670-TLN-EFB P

05-31-2017

E. CHILDS, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He requests an extension of time to file his pretrial statement pursuant to the court's April 19, 2017 order. ECF No. 118. He also requests again that the court appoint counsel. ECF No. 119. Plaintiff's request for an extension of time will be granted, but his request for the appointment of counsel is denied.

As plaintiff has previously informed (see ECF Nos. 17, 37, 47, 68, 86, 117), 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 to 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 once again considered those factors, the court still finds there are no exceptional circumstances in this case.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's request for an extension of time (ECF No. 118) is granted and he has 60 days from the date this order is served to file his pretrial statement.

2. Plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel (ECF No. 119) is denied.

3. Plaintiff's request for the court to order defendants to provide him with "a full copy of the whole case" is denied. ECF No. 118 at 2. If plaintiff wishes to obtain any filings from this case in order to prepare his pretrial statement, he must request copies from the Clerk of the Court at 50 cents a page. In forma pauperis status does not waive the cost of copies. Tedder v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210 (9th Cir. 1989).

So ordered. Dated: May 31, 2017.

/s/_________

EDMUND F. BRENNAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Childs v. State

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 31, 2017
No. 2:13-cv-670-TLN-EFB P (E.D. Cal. May. 31, 2017)
Case details for

Childs v. State

Case Details

Full title:E. CHILDS, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: May 31, 2017

Citations

No. 2:13-cv-670-TLN-EFB P (E.D. Cal. May. 31, 2017)