Castillo

(PC) Martin v. Castillo

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 10, 20221:22-cv-00002California542 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JARED ANDREW MARTIN, ) Case No.: 1:22-cv-00002-SAB (PC) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR v. ) APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL, WITHOUT

PREJUDICE

D. CASTILLO, et al., ) ) (ECF No. 3) Defendants. ) ) )

Plaintiff Jared Andrew Martin is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the instant action on January 3, 2022, along with a separate motion for appointment of counsel. 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 circumstances the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel…

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.