IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
October 22, 2010
RAEKUBIAN A. BARROW, PLAINTIFF,
WARDEN CALIFORNIA MEDICAL FACILITY, CORCORAN, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael J. Seng United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL (ECF No. 16)
On October 8, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking the appointment of counsel.
Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require an attorney to represent plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298, 109 S.Ct. 1814, 1816 (1989).
Plaintiff initiated this action on Feburary 1, 2010. (ECF No. 1.) The Court has not yet screened Plaintiff's complaint to determine whether it states a claim upon which relief could be granted. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges a single incidence of abuse by prison guards; there is no allegation of ongoing or imminent harm. No action is required by Plaintiff until the Court screens his complaint. As such, there is no need to appoint counsel at this stage in the proceedings.
Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel is DENIED. Plaintiff has previously filed three motions to appoint counsel, each of which was denied by this Court. The filing of further motions seeking appointment of counsel before the Court has had an opportunity to screen this complaint would be inappropriate and unproductive and could result in sanctions being imposed against Plainitff.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.