Opinion
1:21-cv-01193-HBK (PC)
12-15-2021
THOMAS K. MILLS, Plaintiff, v. J. RIVERA and Z. JONES, Defendants.
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S SECOND MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL
(DOC. NO. 40)
HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff Thomas K. Mills is a current state prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis on his first amended complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. No. 7). Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's second motion seeking appointment of counsel filed December 6, 2021. (Doc. No. 40).
The Court previously denied Plaintiff appointment of counsel in its Order dated October 6, 2021. (Doc. No. 14). In his instant motion, Plaintiff states he is entitled to appointment of counsel under the Sixth Amendment and/or has a right under the First Amendment to speak to counsel. (Doc. No. 40 at 1). As the Court previously advised Plaintiff, the United States Constitution does not require appointment of counsel in civil cases. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 354 (1996) (explaining Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. at 817, did not create a right to appointment of counsel in civil cases) (emphasis added). This Court considered each of the factors to determine if exceptional circumstances warranted appointment of counsel in this civil matter and determined counsel was not warranted at this stage of the proceedings. (See generally Doc. No. 14). Thus, for the reasons previously set forth in the Court's October 6, 2021 Order, the Court's denies Plaintiffs second motion.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED:
Plaintiffs second motion to appoint counsel (Doc. No. 40) is DENIED without prejudice.