Nogales

Nogales v. Burke

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMarch 2, 20233:22-cv-00702California959 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOSE NOGALES, CDCR #G-52536, Case No.: 22-cv-702-MMA-DEB

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

v. [DKT. NO. 21] ISU OFFICER BURKE, et al., Defendants. 16 I. INTRODUCTION Before the Court is Plaintiff Jose Nogales’ Motion for Appointment of Counsel (“Motion”). Dkt. No. 21. Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis on a claim filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Dkt. Nos. 5, 9. For the reasons discussed below, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion without prejudice. II. BACKGROUND The Court summarized Plaintiff’s claims in the June 6, 2022 Order Screening Complaint. Dkt. No. 4 at 2–5, 10–11.1 / /

27 1 When referencing page numbers for documents filed with the Court, the Court’s citation 28 III. LEGAL STANDARD An indigent’s right to appointed counsel exists “only where the litigant may lose his physical liberty if he loses the litigation.” Lassiter v. Dep’t…

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.