From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mora v. Eaton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 21, 2018
No. 2:14-cv-0581 KJM DB P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 21, 2018)

Opinion

No. 2:14-cv-0581 KJM DB P

08-21-2018

ERIC MORA, Plaintiff, v. EATON, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action, has requested appointment of counsel. Plaintiff primarily argues that he has extremely limited access to the law library.

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 district 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).

The test for exceptional circumstances requires the court to evaluate the plaintiff's 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. See Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986); Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). Circumstances common to most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not establish exceptional circumstances that would warrant a request for voluntary assistance of counsel. In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances.

Currently, the only deadline plaintiff has in this case is filing any objections to the court's Findings and Recommendations, which were filed on June 27, 2018. The court granted plaintiff's request for an extension of time and those objections are due to be placed in the mail on September 12, 2018. (ECF No. 67.) If plaintiff requires additional time to file objections due to his limited library access, he may seek another extension of time.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel (ECF No. 68) is denied. Dated: August 21, 2018

/s/_________

DEBORAH BARNES

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DLB:9
DB/prisoner-civil rights/mora0581.31(2)


Summaries of

Mora v. Eaton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 21, 2018
No. 2:14-cv-0581 KJM DB P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 21, 2018)
Case details for

Mora v. Eaton

Case Details

Full title:ERIC MORA, Plaintiff, v. EATON, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Aug 21, 2018

Citations

No. 2:14-cv-0581 KJM DB P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 21, 2018)