From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Woods v. Carey

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Dec 4, 2013
No. 2:04-cv-1225 LKK AC P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2013)

Opinion

No. 2:04-cv-1225 LKK AC P

12-04-2013

EARNEST CASSELL WOODS, II, Plaintiff, v. TOM L. CAREY, Warden, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. 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 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). In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel will therefore be denied.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel (ECF No. 296) is denied.

___________________

ALLISON CLAIRE

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Woods v. Carey

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Dec 4, 2013
No. 2:04-cv-1225 LKK AC P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2013)
Case details for

Woods v. Carey

Case Details

Full title:EARNEST CASSELL WOODS, II, Plaintiff, v. TOM L. CAREY, Warden, et al.…

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

Date published: Dec 4, 2013

Citations

No. 2:04-cv-1225 LKK AC P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2013)