Cross

(PC) Keen v. Cross

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 10, 20242:24-cv-00299California429 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 BRANDON KEEN, Case No. 2:24-cv-00299-JDP (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER v. DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR

COUNSEL AND DISREGARDING HIS

CROSS, et al., DISCOVERY REQUEST Defendants. ECF No. 12 16 Plaintiff has filed a motion that requests both the appointment of counsel and the release of a video from CDCR. ECF No. 12. Plaintiff is informed that court permission is not necessary for discovery requests and that neither discovery requests served on an opposing party nor that party’s responses should be filed until such time as a party becomes dissatisfied with a response and seeks relief from the court pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Discovery requests between the parties shall not be filed with the court unless, and until, they are at issue. I will therefore disregard plaintiff’s discovery request. Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel, see Rand…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.