Wakefield v. USA
MEMORANDUM DECISION granting in part and denying in part 4 Petitioner's Motion for Sealed Documents from Criminal Case. Signed by Judge Ted Stewart on 10/04/2011. (tls)
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
IRA BURDELL WAKEFIELD,
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING IN PART PETITIONER’S
MOTION FOR DOCUMENTS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Case No. 2:11-CV-76 TS
This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s Motion for Documents. In that Motion,
Petitioner requests a number of documents from his underlying criminal case to help him prepare
his § 2255 Motion.1 The Court will grant the Motion in part and deny it in part.
In his Motion, Petitioner seeks the following documents: (1) the government’s Statement
of Discovery Policy; (2) the government’s proposed witness list; (3) the jury panel record (filed
under seal); (4) the government’s witness and exhibit list; (5) jury notes (filed under seal); and
(6) transcripts from various hearings.
The Court notes that Petitioner’s Motion was filed shortly after he filed a § 2255 Motion.
28 U.S.C. § 753(f) allows free copies of transcripts if the court “certifies that the suit or
appeal is not frivolous and that the transcript is needed to decide the issue presented by the suit or
appeal.” The Tenth Circuit has applied § 753(f) to resolve requests for other court documents.2
Since Petitioner requests two documents that are filed under seal, Petitioner must obtain a court
order in order to access those documents.3
The Court has reviewed Petitioner’s Motion as well as his § 2255 Motion. Based on that
review, the Court finds that it is appropriate for Petitioner to be provided with the majority of the
documents he requests. Specifically, the Court will provide the government’s Statement of
Discovery Policy, the government’s proposed witness list, the government’s witness and exhibit
list, and copies of the requested transcripts. However, the Court will not provide Petitioner with
a copy of the jury panel record or the jury notes. Nothing in his § 2255 Motion pertains to the
jury or the notes they submitted to the Court during trial. Therefore, these documents are not
needed to decide the issues presented in his § 2255 Motion and his request for these documents
will be denied.
It is therefore
ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Documents (Docket No. 4) is GRANTED IN
PART AND DENIED IN PART. The Clerk of the Court is directed to provide Petitioner the
documents set forth above.
United States v. Lewis, 1994 WL 563442, at *1 (10th Cir. Oct. 14, 1994) (applying the §
753(f) standard to a defendant's request for documents).
DATED October 4, 2011.
BY THE COURT:
United States District Judge