Capello

Capello v. Seling

Good Law
321 F. App'x 614
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 3, 2009Nos. 06-35175, 06-35650California785 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Ricardo Capello and Darnell McGary, who are detained at the Washington State Special Commitment Center (“SCC”), appeal the district court’s summary judgment against them on their pro se claims against SCC officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . They also appeal the district court’s denial of them motions for appointed counsel. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Capello and McGary have not demonstrated the “exceptional circumstances” necessary for the appointment of counsel. Agyeman v. Corrections Corp. of America, 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir.2004). The magistrate judge determined that Appellants had demonstrated an adequate ability to articulate their claims pro se and that exceptional circumstances were not present. Although the district court chose to rely on an alternate ground, the magistrate judge’s decision “provide[d] an adequate explanation of its reasons such that its decision may be reviewed by us on appeal.” Solis v. County of Los Angeles, 514 F.3d 946, 958 (9th Cir.2008). The record supports the magistrate judge’s determination. Appellants adequately articulated their claims without counsel. They conducted extensive discovery, and…

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.