Garrett

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner James Garrett appeals pro se from a district court judgment in favor of defendant Ricci, following a jury trial in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that Ricci violated his Eighth Amendment rights by assigning him to an upper bunk against the advice of medical staff. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Garrett’s motion for appointment of counsel because Garrett failed to show exceptional circumstances. See Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir.1997).

The district court did not clearly err in rejecting Garrett’s contention of racial discrimination during jury selection because Garrett presented no supporting evidence beyond his observation that the venire had no African-Americans. See Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 85 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986) (“[A] defendant has no right to a ‘petit jury composed in whole or in part of persons of his own race.’ ”); see also Johnson v. Campbell, 92 F.3d 951, 953 (9th Cir.1996) (reviewing for clear error).

Garrett also presented no evidence to support his contention that one of the jurors was biased…