Sasser v. Hobbs

Filing 260

ORDER denying 221 Motion to Settle the Record; granting 234 Motion in Limine; denying 241 Motion for Order; denying 243 Motion in Limine; denying 246 Motion in Limine; denying 248 Motion in Limine; denying 250 Motion in Limine; denying 251 Motion in Limine. (See Order for specifics.) Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes, III on February 2, 2016. (mll)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION
ANDREW SASSER
V.

PETITIONER
CIVIL NO. 00-4036

WENDY KELLEY, Director
Arkansas Department of Corrections

RESPONDENT
ORDER

The above referenced matter came before the Court on Monday, February 1, 2016, for a prehearing conference. During the conference, the Court took up the pre-trial motions and ordered as
follows1:
*

Petitioner’s Motion to Settle the Record (Doc. 221) is denied. The Court finds no

proof that the witness declarations were accepted as substantive testimony in the previous Atkins
hearing. The Respondent is further entitled to cross-examination of those witnesses.
*

Respondent’s Motion in Limine (Doc. 234) seeking to preclude the testimony of

Carmalita Williams is granted. Any subpoena issued to Ms. Williams in accordance with this
Court’s previous Opinion and Order (Doc. 242) approving the issuance of a subpoena for Ms.
Williams should be recalled.
*

Respondent’s Motion for Leave to Take Testimony by Video Deposition (Doc. 241)

is denied. The testimony of Charles Potter is critical to the central issues before the Court, and the
Court has moved the hearing to Texarkana, where Mr. Potter lives. Any difficulty Mr. Potter might
have in getting to the courthouse in Texarkana to testify pursuant to subpoena should be minimal.

1

To the extent that this order conflicts with any oral pronouncement at the pre-trial
conference, the findings in this order are the final and binding findings of the Court in the current
matter.

*

Respondent’s Motion in Limine to Prohibit Testimony of Mark Bezy (Doc. 243) is

denied. The Court will allow the testimony of Mr. Bezy to the extent that it is helpful and not
redundant.
*

Respondent’s Motion in Limine to Exclude Testimony of Jackie Carter (Doc. 246)

is denied. The Court will allow the testimony of Ms. Carter to the extent that it is relevant and
admissible.
*

Petitioner’s Motion in Limine (Doc. 248) concerning the testimony of Roger Moore

is denied. The Court will allow the testimony of Mr. Moore to the extent that it is relevant to the
issues currently before the Court.
*

Respondent’s Motion in Limine to Prohibit Testimony of Richard Burr (Doc. 250)

is denied. The Court will allow the testimony of Mr. Burr to the extent that it concerns the
prevailing professional norms at the time(s) in question.
*

Respondent’s Motion in Limine to Prohibit Evidence of Administrative Licensure

Proceedings Pertaining to Mary Pat Carlson (Doc. 251) is denied. The Court will allow the
admission of evidence concerning the Ms. Carlson’s professional file and any licensure proceedings
to the extent that it is relevant and admissible.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 2nd day of February, 2016.

s/P. K. Holmes, III
P.K. HOLMES, III
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE