Ponce
Ponce v. Hanford Police Department K-9 Unit
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DAVID PONCE, Case No. 1:21-cv-01045-DAD-BAM Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO BE APPOINTED COUNSEL
v. (Doc. 6) HANFORD POLICE DEPARTMENT K-
UNIT,
15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff David Ponce is a county jail inmate proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 20, 2021, Plaintiff filed the instant motion requesting that the Court appoint him counsel in this action. (Doc. 6.) Plaintiff explains that he is an indigent inmate with limited resources and supplies as an attorney. (Id. at 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), rev’d in part on other grounds, 154 F.3d 952, 954 n.1 (9th Cir. 1998). The court cannot require an attorney to represent plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(1). Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Court for the S. Dist. of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). However, in…