Andrew

(PC) Ricalls v. Andrew

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 1, 20232:23-cv-00771California455 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JAMES LEONARD RICALLS, No. 2:23-cv-00771-EFB (PC) Plaintiff, v. ORDER P. ANDREWS, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He has paid the filing fee. On June 12, 2023, the court screened plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and dismissed it with leave to amend. ECF No. 4. Since then, plaintiff has filed motions for leave to file an amended complaint, appointment of counsel, and to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF Nos. 5-7. As noted, the court has already given plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint and he has paid the filing fee. Accordingly, plaintiff’s motions for leave to file an amended complaint and to proceed in forma pauperis are denied as unnecessary. As for the motion for appointment of counsel, the court notes that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in…

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.