(PC)Candler
(PC)Candler v. Ball
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 STEVEN RANAE GLEEN CANDLER, No. 1:23-cv-00459-JLT-SAB (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S FOURTH (AND FINAL) MOTION FOR EXTENSION v. OF TIME AND DENYING REQUEST FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
JOHN & JANE DOES, et al., (ECF No. 23) Defendants. 14 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s fourth motion for an extension of time and appointment of counsel, filed August 10, 2023. First, as to Plaintiff’s request for appointment of counsel, he 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…