Mackey v. Bloomfield

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 VINCENT ROBERT MACKEY, Case No. 22-cv-05105-JSC 8 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 9 Vv. APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 10 SGT. BAKER, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 50 ll Defendants. 12 Plaintiff moves for appointment of a lawyer to represent him in this civil rights case. 13 There is no right to counsel in a civil case such as this. See Lassiter v. Dep't of Social Services, 14 |] 452 US. 18, 25 (1981). The decision to request counsel to represent an indigent litigant under § 3 15 1915 is within “the sound discretion of the trial court and is granted only in exceptional a 16 circumstances.” Franklin vy. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1236 (9th Cir. 1984). Plaintiff presents no 3 17 || exceptional circumstances, nor are any apparent. At least at this stage, the issues in this case are S 18 || not sufficiently complex, nor is Plaintiff unable to effectively present his claims, such that the 19 || interests of justice necessitate referral for location of pro bono counsel to assist Plaintiff. 20 Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. Should referral for location of 21 pro bono counsel become necessary at a later time, the Court will issue a referral order on its own; 22 || Plaintiff need and shall not request appointment of counsel in this Court again. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 || Dated: January 2, 2024 25 26 appetite Selo JAQQUELINE SCOTT CORL 27 United States District Judge 28