(PC) Suarez v. Clark

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 16, 20221:22-cv-00160California637 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSE ALFREDO SUAREZ, ) Case No.: 1:22-cv-00160-SAB (PC) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR v. ) APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL, WITHOUT

PREJUDICE

KEN CLARK, ) ) (ECF No. 7) Defendant. ) ) )

Plaintiff Jose Alfredo Suarez 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 appointment of counsel, filed February 14, 2022. Plaintiff asks for appointment of counsel because he is unable to afford counsel; his imprisonment limits his ability to litigate the action; he has limited knowledge of the law and access to the law library; he is housed in the security housing unit; a trial would likely involve conflicting testimony; and he has limited knowledge of the English language. (ECF No. 7.) There is no constitutional right to appointed counsel in this…

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.