Quick

(PC) Jackson v. Quick

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 4, 20231:19-cv-01591California479 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 11 CORNEL JACKSON, Case No. 1:19-cv-01591-JLT-EPG (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S EIGHTH MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF PRO v. BONO COUNSEL 14 JASON QUICK, et al., (ECF No. 140) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Cornel Jackson is a pretrial detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 18 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 On April 3, 2023, Plaintiff filed his eighth motion for appointment of pro bono counsel. 20 (ECF Nos. 4, 9, 13, 28, 58, 96, 129, 140). Generally, Plaintiff moves for appointment of counsel 21 because his confinement limits his ability to litigate, the issues involved in this case are complex 22 and will require significant research and investigation, and he is unable to afford 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have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), withdrawn in part on other grounds, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 1998), and the Court cannot require an attorney to…

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.