Atwood, et al v. Stewart, et al
Filing
442
ORDER GRANTING 433 Joint Motion to Conduct Expert Depositions. IT IS ORDERED that the parties are authorized to conduct depositions of their respective mental health experts, Drs. Nelson and Schwartz-Watts.The expenses and fees incurred for the tak ing of depositions authorized herein shall be the responsibility of the discovering party, except that the parties shall be jointly responsible for the deposition of Stanton Bloom. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court provide a copy of this Order to the Courts CJA Voucher Review Office. (See attched PDF for complete information). Signed by Judge John C Coughenour on 7/24/13.(BAC)
1
WO
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
9
Frank Jarvis Atwood,
10
Petitioner,
11
DEATH PENALTY CASE
vs.
12
No. CV-98-116-TUC-JCC
Charles L. Ryan, et al.,
13
ORDER GRANTING DISCOVERY
Respondents.
14
15
Before the Court is the Parties’ Joint Motion to Conduct Expert Depositions,
16
which seeks authorization to depose each party’s respective mental health expert. Rule
17
6(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases provides that a “judge may, for good
18
cause, authorize a party to conduct discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
19
and may limit the extent of discovery.” Rule 6(a), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254; see also Bracy
20
v. Gramley, 520 U.S. 899, 904 (1997).
21
The Court finds good cause for the requested depositions of the two mental health
22
expert witnesses. In a case such as this, where the petitioner’s mental state at the time of
23
the offense is in dispute, depositions of the experts will efficiently uncover the bases of
24
their opinions and significantly narrow the scope of direct testimony and cross-
25
examination. Pursuant to Rule 26(b)(4)(E) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the
26
party seeking discovery shall be responsible for paying the expert a reasonable fee for the
27
time spent responding to and attending the deposition. Although permitted under Rule
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
6(c) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, the Court declines to require
Respondents to pay the travel expenses, subsistence expenses, and fees of Petitioner’s
attorney to attend the deposition of Petitioner’s expert because Petitioner is represented
jointly by the Federal Public Defender and counsel appointed under the Criminal Justice
Act.
The Court further finds good cause for the scheduled videotaped deposition of trial
counsel Stanton Bloom, whose representation of Petitioner at sentencing is at issue. The
Court, through staff, informally conveyed to the parties its preference for a videotaped
deposition of Bloom in lieu of live testimony at the evidentiary hearing given Bloom’s
unavailability at the time of the hearing. Because the parties have filed a joint notice of
deposition of Bloom (Doc. 439), any costs associated with the taking of Bloom’s
deposition shall be borne jointly by the parties.
Based on the foregoing,
IT IS ORDERED that the Joint Motion to Conduct Expert Depositions (Doc.
433) is GRANTED. The parties are authorized to conduct depositions of their respective
mental health experts, Drs. Nelson and Schwartz-Watts.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the expenses and fees incurred for the taking
of depositions authorized herein shall be the responsibility of the discovering party,
except that the parties shall be jointly responsible for the deposition of Stanton Bloom.
With respect to the deposition of Respondents’ expert noticed by Petitioner and
authorized herein, if not paid through the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner’s CJA
counsel is authorized to be reimbursed for court reporter and transcript costs associated
with deposing Respondents’ expert. Reimbursement for transcripts shall be claimed on a
CJA 24 pursuant to section 230.63.20 of the Guide to Judiciary Policies and Procedures,
Vol. VII. Reimbursement for court reporter fees shall be itemized as an “other expense”
on counsel’s CJA 30 voucher.
27
28
-2-
1
2
3
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court provide a copy of this
Order to the Court’s CJA Voucher Review Office.
DATED this 24th day of July, 2013.
4
5
6
A
7
8
9
10
John C. Coughenour
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-
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?