From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ontiveros v. Cal. Dep't of Corr. & Rehab.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 24, 2017
No. 2:17-cv-1740 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2017)

Opinion

No. 2:17-cv-1740 CKD P

08-24-2017

HERMAN RENE ONTIVEROS, Plaintiff, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 together with a request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Plaintiff has not, however, filed his application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on the form used by this district. Accordingly, plaintiff's application will be dismissed and plaintiff will be provided the opportunity to submit the application on the appropriate form.

Plaintiff also requests that the court appoint counsel. 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 plaintiff's 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) (district court did not abuse discretion in declining to appoint counsel). The burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances is on the plaintiff. Id. Circumstances common to most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not establish exceptional circumstances that warrant a request for voluntary assistance of counsel.

Having considered the factors under Palmer, the court finds that plaintiff has failed to meet his burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of counsel at this time.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is dismissed without prejudice;

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff a new Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis By a Prisoner;

3. Plaintiff shall submit, within thirty days from the date of this order, a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff's failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal; and

4. Plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel (ECF No. 3) is denied. Dated: August 24, 2017

/s/_________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1/mp
onti1740.3d+31


Summaries of

Ontiveros v. Cal. Dep't of Corr. & Rehab.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 24, 2017
No. 2:17-cv-1740 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2017)
Case details for

Ontiveros v. Cal. Dep't of Corr. & Rehab.

Case Details

Full title:HERMAN RENE ONTIVEROS, Plaintiff, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS…

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

Date published: Aug 24, 2017

Citations

No. 2:17-cv-1740 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2017)