(PC) Hampton v. California Correctional Healthcare Services

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 THOMAS LEROY HAMPTON, Case No. 1:22-cv-00518-HBK (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

v. (Doc. No. 31) KIWANA HILL, et al.,

Defendants. 16 Pending before the Court is pro se Plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel, filed on April 7, 2025. (Doc. No. 31, “Motion”). Plaintiff seeks appointment counsel because: (1) he cannot afford legal counsel, (2) he has been unable to obtain legal representation, (3) he believes his case is complex, (4) he lacks legal training and resources, and (5) his incarceration limits his access to information, evidence, and individuals necessary to litigate effectively. (See Doc. No. 31). For the reasons set forth below, the Court denies Plaintiff’s Motion. The United States Constitution does not require appointment of counsel in civil cases. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 354 (1996) (explaining Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817 (1996), did not create a right to…