Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHRISTOPHER HAWKINS, Case No.: 25-cv-03183-AJB-JAC CDCR #CC-0532, 12 ORDER: Plaintiff, 13 vs. (1) DENYING MOTIONS FOR 14 DISCOVERY, SANCTIONS AND 15 APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL, and DERRICK WILLIAMS, SAN DIEGO 16 COUNTY, SAN DIEGO COUNTY (2) DISMISSING ACTION FOR SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, SAN 17 FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM DIEGO COUNTY JAIL and AND FAILURE TO PROSECUTE 18 DOES 1-10, 19 Defendants. 20 21 22 On October 31, 2025, Plaintiff Christopher Hawkins, an inmate at the San Diego 23 Central Jail at the time of the events, proceeding pro se, initiated this civil action pursuant 24 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. Nos. 1–2.) On December 18, 2025, the Court granted Plaintiff 25 leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed the Complaint without prejudice 26 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) & 1915A(b) for failure to state a claim. (Doc. No. 3.) 27 Plaintiff was notified of the deficiencies of his pleading and granted leave to amend on or 28 before February 2, 2026. (Id. at 9.) The date for filing an amended complaint was extended 1 to April 20, 2026 (Doc. No. 7), and again to June 4, 2026 (Doc. No. 9). As of the date of 2 this Order, Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. 3 However, on June 8, 2026, Plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel to 4 assist him in seeking discovery, sanctions, and settlement. (Doc. No. 10.) He indicates he 5 needs “appointment of counsel to produce discovery towards the outcome of settlement in 6 the acquirement of receipt of payment for damages in the amount of 1 lump sum.” (Id. at 7 3–4.) It is unclear what sanctions he is seeking, but it appears to involve either his transfer 8 to the San Quentin Rehabilitation Center during the pendency of this action or the 9 conditions of his confinement there. (Id. at 1–3.) 10 There is no constitutional right to counsel in a civil case, and the decision to appoint 11 counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) is within “the sound discretion of the trial court and 12 is granted only in exception circumstances.” Agyeman v. Corr. Corp. of America, 390 F.3d 13 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004); Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991) (noting 14 that only “exceptional circumstances” support such a discretionary appointment). Such 15 exceptional circumstances exist where there is cumulative showing of both a likelihood of 16 success on the merits and an inability of the pro se litigant to articulate his claims in light 17 of their legal complexity. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009). 18 As noted in the Court’s prior dismissal order, Plaintiff’s allegations regarding the 19 conditions at the jail failed to state a claim because they were conclusory, lacking detail 20 regarding when they happened, and failed to connect any Defendant with any alleged 21 action. (Doc. No. 3 at 6–8.) For the reasons discussed in that Order, Plaintiff has not shown 22 he is likely to succeed on the merits of the claims. (Id.) Because Plaintiff’s claims are not 23 legally complex and he has shown an ability to articulate his claims, exceptional 24 circumstances warranting appointment of counsel do not exist in this case. There is not a 25 cumulative showing of both a likelihood of success on the merits and an inability of the 26 pro se litigant to articulate his claims in light of their legal complexity. Palmer, 560 F.3d 27 at 970. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel to 28 assist him in obtaining discovery and sanctions. 1 As noted, Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint although he has had over 2 ||seven months to do so. Plaintiff was instructed that failure to amend would result in 3 || dismissal of this action for failure to state a claim and failure to prosecute. (Doc. No. 3 at 4 119 (quoting Lira v. Herrera, 427 F.3d 1164, 1169 (9th Cir. 2005) (“If a plaintiff does not 5 ||take advantage of the opportunity to fix his complaint, a district court may convert the 6 || dismissal of the complaint into dismissal of the entire action.”’)).) 7 Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel, 8 || discovery and sanctions (Doc. No. 11) and DISMISSES this action without prejudice for 9 failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 10 |1§§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) & 1915A(b)(1), and for failure to prosecute. The Clerk of Court will 11 || enter final judgment accordingly and close the file. 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 Dated: July 28, 2026 15 United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 □ ee