Youngblood

(PC) Norris v. Youngblood

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 28, 20211:21-cv-00704California644 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

URIE NORRIS, ) Case No.: 1:21-cv-00704-SAB (PC) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION v. ) FOR CONTINUANCE AND APPOINTMENT

OF COUNSEL

DONNY YOUNGBLOOD, et al., ) ) (ECF No. 20) Defendants. ) ) )

Plaintiff Urie Norris is proceeding 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 a continuance and appointment of counsel, filed September 24, 2021, self-dated by Plaintiff on September 15, 2021. Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require any attorney to represent plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). However, in certain exceptional…

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.