Gomez

(PC) Merino v. Gomez

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 1, 20222:21-cv-00572California437 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 FRANCISCO MERINO, No. 2:21-cv-0572 TLN KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER GOMEZ, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se, in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court are four requests for appointment of counsel filed by plaintiff. Also pending is plaintiff’s request for an investigation into plaintiff’s claims against defendant Navarro. Requests for Appointment of Counsel District courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional circumstances, the court may request an attorney to voluntarily represent such a plaintiff. See 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). When determining whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, the court…

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.