Rosales v. Martinez

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of California denied Miguel Rosales’s motion for reconsideration of the prior denial of appointed counsel. The court held that Rosales had not shown newly discovered evidence, clear error, an intervening change in law, or exceptional circumstances under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1).

Holdings

1. Reconsideration was not warranted because plaintiff did not identify newly discovered evidence, clear error, an intervening change in controlling law, or meaningful changed circumstances.
2. Plaintiff did not establish exceptional circumstances warranting appointment of counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1).

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiff established a basis for reconsideration of the prior order denying appointment of counsel.
2. Whether plaintiff demonstrated exceptional circumstances warranting appointment of counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1).

Disposition

other