Salinas v. Montgomery
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ARMANDO SALINAS, Case No.: 19cv0744-AJB(RBB) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
APPOINT COUNSEL
v. [ECF NO. 22] W.L. MONTGOMERY, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Armando Salinas is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, alleging civil rights violations pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendant A. Young, formerly known as F. Hodo. On September 22, 2020, the Court received Plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel, which was filed nunc pro tunc to September 18, 2020 [ECF No. 22]. Plaintiff requests that counsel be appointed because he is unable to access the prison law library due to the COVID-19 pandemic and needs counsel’s assistance with conducting discovery. (Pl.’s Mot. 1, ECF No. 22.) As explained below, his motion is DENIED. “[T]here is no absolute right to counsel in civil proceedings.” Hedges v. Resolution Trust Corp., 32 F.3d 1360, 1363 (9th Cir. 1994) (citation omitted). District 27 …