Shearer

(PC) Ruiz v. Shearer

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 13, 20212:20-cv-02078California386 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 ROGELIO MAY RUIZ, No. 2:20-cv-2078 TLN DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER A. SHEARER, et al., Defendants. 15 Plaintiff is a state prisoner who was proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Judgment was entered and this action was closed on July 6, 2021. (ECF Nos. 24, 25.) Presently before the court is plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel. (ECF No. 26.) The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the district court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). The test for exceptional circumstances requires the court to evaluate the…

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.