(PC) McDowell v. Smith

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 GIOVANNI MCDOWELL, No. 1:24-cv-00500-JLT-SAB (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL,

v. WITHOUT PREJUDICE STEVE SMITH, et al., (ECF No. 29)

Defendants.

13 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel, filed November 18, 2024. Plaintiff seeks appointment of counsel because he does not “know the fundamentals of California law, such as when to produce supporting documents.” (ECF No. 29 at 2.) Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require any attorney to represent plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296,…