Roseberry v. Ryan et al
ORDER that Respondents' motion for an order precluding Petitioner's legal team from contacting victims (Doc. 8 ) is granted as follows. No person who is defined as a victim in this matter under Arizona law shall be contacted by anyone wo rking on behalf of Petitioner unless the victim has consented to such contact. Petitioner shall advise Respondents if he wishes to contact a victim. Respondents shall then advise the victim, or victims counsel, of Petitioner's request. If a victim does not consent, and Petitioner nonetheless believes contact is necessary, Petitioner may file a motion with the Court explaining the necessity for such contact. See order for details. Signed by Judge Neil V. Wake on 9/16/15. (NKS)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Homer Ray Roseberry,
Charles L. Ryan, et al.,
DEATH PENALTY CASE
Before the Court is Respondents’ motion seeking an order prohibiting members of
Petitioner’s legal team from contacting the victims in this case and directing that any such
contact be initiated through counsel for Respondents. (Doc. 8.)
In support of their request, Respondents cite provisions of state and federal law,
including A.R.S. § 13–4433(B), which provides that “[t]he defendant, the defendant’s
attorney or an agent of the defendant shall only initiate contact with the victim through
the prosecutor’s office,” and the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA), which gives state
crime victims in federal habeas cases “the right to be treated with fairness and with
respect for the victim’s dignity and privacy.” 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(8). Petitioner opposes
the motion, arguing that the Court is not bound by A.R.S. § 13–4433(B) and that an order
precluding contact is not necessary to implement the principles of the CVRA. (Doc. 12.)
As discussed at the case management conference on September 15, 2015, it does
not appear that A.R.S. § 13–4433(B) directly applies to these proceedings. However, the
Court independently finds that the statute provides a reasonable mechanism for furthering
the CVRA’s goal of respecting a crime victim’s dignity and privacy without unduly
IT IS ORDERED that Respondents’ motion for an order precluding Petitioner’s
legal team from contacting victims (Doc. 8) is granted as follows. No person who is
defined as a victim in this matter under Arizona law shall be contacted by anyone
working on behalf of Petitioner unless the victim has consented to such contact.
Petitioner shall advise Respondents if he wishes to contact a victim. Respondents shall
then advise the victim, or victim’s counsel, of Petitioner’s request. If a victim does not
consent, and Petitioner nonetheless believes contact is necessary, Petitioner may file a
motion with the Court explaining the necessity for such contact.
Dated this 16th day of September, 2015.
Neil V. Wake
United States District 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?