Rangel

Rangel v. Williams

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 23, 20213:21-cv-00278California369 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 JONATHAN RANGEL, Case No. 21-cv-00278-JSC

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTIONS FOR

v. APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AND

FOR ADDITIONAL LAW LIBRARY

V. WILLIAMS, et al., ACCESS Defendants. Re: Dkt. Nos. 8,

Plaintiff, a California prisoner, filed this civil rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He has filed a motion for appointment of counsel. There is no constitutional right to counsel in a civil case. Lassiter v. Dep't of Social Services, 452 U.S. 18, 25 (1981). 28 U.S.C. § 1915 confers on a district court only the power to "request" that counsel represent a litigant who is proceeding in forma pauperis. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). The Court has only the power to ask pro bono counsel to represent Plaintiff, not the power to “appoint” counsel. Plaintiff has presented his claims effectively, and the issues, at least at this stage, are not complex. The motion is DENIED. If circumstances change such that…

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.