Santiesteban

(PC) Valenzuela v. Santiesteban

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 9, 20211:20-cv-01093California703 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MARIO A. VALENZUELA, Case No. 1:20-cv-01093-NONE-BAM (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

TO APPOINT COUNSEL

v. (ECF No. 25) SANTIESTEBAN, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Mario A. Valenzuela (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds against Defendants Santiesteban, Rodriguez, and Alejo for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment and against Defendant Perez for failure to protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment, arising from the incident on June 22, 2019. This case is currently set for a video settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Boone on March 25, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. (ECF No. 24.) Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion requesting appointment of counsel, filed February 4, 2021. (ECF No. 25.) Plaintiff states that he has a mental illness, is a participant of the mental health…

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.