The trial court noted the right of criminal defendants to appointed counsel, cited the statute governing the appointment of public defenders, but stated it was without authority to appoint an attorney for a plaintiff in a civil case, and denied the motion. relating to pain medication, dosage and his spinal condition (2) his limited ability to investigate the facts, obtain discovery and get expert witnesses (3) the legal complexity of the case and (4) his showing that, on their face, his claims had merit. He filed a motion for the appointment of counsel, arguing the trial court should consider (1) the factual complexity of the issues * Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rules 8.1105(b) and 8.1110, this opinion is certified for publication with the exception of part II. ooOooPlaintiff Gregory Smith is an indigent, self-represented prison inmate pursuing medical malpractice claims against a doctor and a nurse practitioner employed by the Pleasant Valley State Prison (Pleasant Valley). Low, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendants and Respondents. Anderson, Assistant Attorney General, Neah Huynh and Allison M. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Monica N. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. OGBUEHI et al., OPINION Defendants and Respondents. Furthermore, an indigent civil litigant may argue on appeal that the right of meaningful access to the courts provides a basis for appointing counsel despite not raising that specific argument in the trial court.įiled 8/6/19 CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION* IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT GREGORY SMITH, F075882 Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. The court held that the discretionary appointment of an expert pursuant to Evidence Code section 730 is among the measures available to trial courts to ensure indigent prisoner litigants are afforded meaningful access to the courts, and trial courts are responsible for recognizing their discretionary authority to appoint counsel for indigent civil litigants who request the appointment of counsel. The court published a portion of this decision because it resolved issues not reached in those appellate decisions. The court held that the trial court's denial of the motion to appoint counsel was not based on an informed exercise of its discretion, and the appropriate remedy was to remand the matter to the trial court for an exercise of its discretionary authority within the three-step inquiry established in published appellate decisions: Apollo v. The Court of Appeal held that one of the discretionary measures available to protect the right of access to the courts is the appointment of counsel, and thus the trial court had the discretionary authority to appoint counsel. The California Constitution and Penal Code section 2601, subdivision (d) provide indigent prisoners with the right of meaningful access to the courts to prosecute civil actions.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |