(PC) Donaldson v. Garland

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 21, 20232:21-cv-01178California391 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RICHARD JULIUS DONALDSON, No. 2:21-cv-1178 DJC KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER MERRICK GARLAND, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a former federal prisoner, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, with this civil action pursuant to Bivens vs. Six Unknown Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Plaintiff requests that the court appoint counsel. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that 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 district court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 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). The test for exceptional circumstances requires the court to evaluate the plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits as well as…

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.