(PC) Harris v. California Forensic Medical Group

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 2, 20202:19-cv-02020California380 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANTOINE W. HARRIS, No. 2:19-cv-2020 DB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 CALIFORNIA FORENSIC MEDICAL GROUP, et al., 15 Defendants. 16

17 Plaintiff, a former Solano county inmate proceeding pro se with a civil rights action, has 18 requested appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 2). In support of the motion, plaintiff states in part 19 that the issues in this case are complex and will require significant research and investigation. 20 (See id.). Plaintiff also states that he has no access to a law library and that he has limited 21 knowledge of the law. (See id.). 22 The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require 23 counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 24 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the district court may request the 25 voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 26 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v.…

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.