United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2023

(PC) DeOllas v. County of Sacramento

(PC) DeOllas v. County of Sacramento
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided October 30, 2023
(PC) DeOllas v. County of Sacramento

Trial Court Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ANTHONY EUGENE DeOLLAS II, No. 2:22-cv-0906 DB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff has requested a third extension of time to file the second amended complaint pursuant to the court’s order of August 1, 2023. Plaintiff has also requested appointment of counsel.

20 The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 22 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the district court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 24 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990).

25 The test for exceptional circumstances requires the court to evaluate the plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. See Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986); Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). Circumstances | common to most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not | establish exceptional circumstances that would warrant a request for voluntary assistance of | counsel. In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances.

4 Good cause appearing, this request for extension of time will be granted. However, no | further extension of time will be granted. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. Plaintiffs motion for the appointment of counsel (ECF No. 14) is denied; 7 2. Plaintiffs motion for an extension of time is granted; and 8 3. Plaintiff is granted one hundred and eighty days (180) days from the date of this order | in which to file the second amended complaint. No further extension of time will be granted for | this purpose.

11 | Dated: October 27, 2023 14 ORAH BARNES DLBT UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE |} deol0906.31+36.thr.ame

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.