Sherman

(PC) Holmes v. Sherman

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 22, 20231:20-cv-00737California609 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TERREL HOLMES, Case No. 1:20-cv-00737-ADA-HBK (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

v. (Doc. No. 37) M. MUELLER, Defendant. 16 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s renewed motion for appointment of counsel filed on August 29, 2023. (Doc. No. 37). Plaintiff, a state prisoner, who is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis on his First Amended Complaint as screened, seeks appointment counsel because he is indigent and has limited access to the law library. (Doc. No. 37 at 1-2). Plaintiff believes his claims are complex and counsel would be better able to present testimony and evidence. (Id. at 2). The Court previously denied Plaintiff appointment of counsel. (Doc. No. 32). Plaintiff presents no changed circumstances for the Court to reconsider its previous order. As previously advised, the United States Constitution does not require appointment of counsel in civil cases. See Lewis v.…

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.