(PC) Mitchell v. Gonzales

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 29, 20241:23-cv-00062California432 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOHN EDWARD MITCHELL, No. 1:23-cv-00062-SAB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL,

13 v. WITHOUT PREJUDICE 14 C. GONZALES, et al., (ECF No. 44) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff John Edward Mitchell is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action filed 18 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel, filed April 25, 20 2024. (ECF No. 44.) In support of the motion Plaintiff states he cannot afford counsel, his 21 imprisonment will limit his ability to litigate, he has limited access to the law library, and a trial 22 will likely involve conflicting testimony where counsel would enable Plaintiff to present evidence 23 and cross examine witnesses. (Id. at 1-2.) 24 The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require 25 counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States…

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.