Mendoza

(PC) Bahena v. Mendoza

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 26, 20241:22-cv-01585California873 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ESMELING L. BAHENA, Case No. 1:22-cv-01585-BAM (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

13 v. (ECF No. 58) 14 MENDOZA, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff Esmeling L. Bahena (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 18 forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on 19 Plaintiff’s second amended complaint against Defendant Mendoza for excessive force and 20 deliberate indifference to medical care in violation of the Eighth Amendment. All parties have 21 consented to United States Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (ECF No. 40.) 22 Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s renewed motion for appointment of counsel, filed 23 February 26, 2024. (ECF No. 58.) Plaintiff states that he is unable to afford counsel, and his 24 imprisonment will greatly limit his ability to litigate. Plaintiff states that he is suffering 25 retaliation from CSP-Sac A-Yard correctional officers, who repeatedly conduct…

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.