Benjamin v. Thomas (DEATH PENALTY)
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 30 Motion to Expand the Record, as further set out in order. Signed by Honorable Judge Wallace Capel, Jr on 8/6/2015. (wcl, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
BRANDYN JOSEPHE BENJAMIN, )
JEFFERSON S. DUNN,
CASE NO. 1:14-CV-1224-WKW-WC
(WO – Do Not Publish)
Before the court is Petitioner Brandyn Josephe Benjamin’s (“Petitioner”)
Motion to Expand the Record filed pursuant to Rule 7 of the Rules Governing
Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. (Doc. # 30.) Petitioner
seeks to expand the habeas record to include the prosecutor’s voir dire notes and
certain omitted transcript pages from Petitioner’s trial and sentencing hearing.
After reviewing Petitioner’s motion and the State’s response, the court finds
that Petitioner’s motion (Doc. # 30) is due to be GRANTED IN PART and
DENIED IN PART. In its response to Petitioner’s motion, the State indicates that
the prosecutor’s voir dire notes were entered into the record as a sealed court
exhibit during the Rule 32 proceeding but were inadvertently unsealed and
included in the clerk’s record. (See Doc. # 31.) As a result, the sealed exhibit was
included in the habeas record submitted to this court. (See Doc. # 31.) An
independent review of the habeas record submitted to the court confirms that this
sealed exhibit is indeed part of the record. Thus, to the extent Petitioner seeks to
expand the record to include the prosecutor’s voir dire notes, that motion is
DENIED AS MOOT.
The State has no objection to expanding the habeas record to include page
72 of the trial transcript and page 23 of the September 2, 2004 sentencing hearing
transcript. Accordingly, Petitioner’s motion to expand the record to include those
pages is GRANTED, and the State shall supplement the record with the foregoing
pages on or before August 14, 2015.
DONE this 6th day of August, 2015.
/s/ Wallace Capel
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?