(PC) Carr v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 29, 20211:17-cv-01769California661 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CLAUDE CARR, ) Case No. 1:17-cv-01769-DAD-SAB (PC) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR v. ) APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL, WITHOUT

PREJUDICE

TED PRUITT, ) ) (ECF No. 87) Defendant. ) ) )

Plaintiff Claude Carr is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel, filed on 21, 2021. Defendant has not yet had an opportunity to file a response, but the Court finds a response unnecessary. The motion is deemed submitted. Local Rule 230(l). Plaintiff seeks appointment of counsel because he is indigent, is imprisonment, has limited access to the law library, limited knowledge of the law, and a trial will likely involve conflicting testimony. Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. 21 …

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.