Lozovoy
(PC) Randolph v. Lozovoy
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10 11 COLIN M. RANDOLPH, Case No. 1:16-cv-01528-DAD-EPG (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF PRO BONO v. COUNSEL
R. LOZOVOY, (ECF NO. 65)
Defendant.
17 Colin Randolph (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 15, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of pro bono counsel. (ECF No. 65). Plaintiff asks for appointment of counsel because he will be unable to “properly and persuasively” cross-examine Defendant; because Plaintiff is unable to afford counsel; because Plaintiff has attempted to obtain counsel but has been unable to; and because documents relevant to this case were taken from Plaintiff.1 Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), withdrawn in part on other grounds, 154 F.3d 952 27…