(PC) Lewis v. Clark

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 10, 20201:20-cv-00120California429 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PAUL DIXON LEWIS, Case No. 1:20-cv-00120-DAD-JDP

Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

v. ECF No. 11 KEN CLARK, et al., Defendants.

17 Plaintiff Paul Dixon Lewis, a state prisoner without counsel, brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 3, 2020, he filed a motion requesting appointment of counsel. ECF No. 11. He submits that he suffers from a variety of medical ailments, has limited access to the law library, and cannot afford an attorney. Id. Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, see Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), withdrawn in part on other grounds on reh’g en banc, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 1998), and the court lacks the authority to require an attorney to represent plaintiff, see Mallard v. U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). We may request the voluntary…

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.