Alan Williams v. Anthony Hedgepeth

Filing 104

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Rozella A. Oliver re REQUEST for Protective Order STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 103 (dml)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ROB BONTA Attorney General of California LANCE E. WINTERS Chief Assistant Attorney General SUSAN SULLIVAN PITHEY Senior Assistant Attorney General XIOMARA COSTELLO Deputy Attorney General TAYLOR NGUYEN Deputy Attorney General State Bar No. 213785 300 South Spring Street, Suite 1702 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Telephone: (213) 269-6009 Fax: (916) 731-2122 E-mail: DocketingLAAWT@doj.ca.gov Attorneys for Respondent 10 CUAUHTÉMOC ORTEGA (Bar No. 257443) Federal Public Defender 11 MORIAH S. RADIN (Bar No. 260245) Deputy Federal Public Defender 12 321 East 2nd Street Los Angeles, California 90012-4202 13 Telephone: (213) 894-5192 Facsimile: (213) 894-0081 14 E-mail: Moriah_Radin@fd.org 15 Attorneys for Petitioner ALAN WILLIAMS 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 17 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 18 19 20 21 ALAN WILLIAMS, 22 23 24 25 26 v. Case No. CV 12-08287-MCS (RAO) Petitioner, STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RAYMOND MADDEN, Warden, Respondent. The Honorable Rozella A. Oliver United States Magistrate Judge 27 28 1 1 Pursuant to Bittaker v. Woodford, 331 F.3d 715 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc), 2 Petitioner and Respondent, through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate and 3 agree as follows: 4 1) Pursuant to the parties’ Joint Discovery Stipulation filed June 10, 5 2021, and this Court’s order approving the Joint Discovery Stipulation filed 6 June 11, 2021, the parties expect to receive documents and other materials 7 from: (a) the Los Angeles County Alternate Public Defender’s Office or 8 Deputy Alternate Public Defender Jason D. Sanabria, including his or their 9 investigators or staff, in connection with their representation of Petitioner in 10 People v. Williams, Los Angeles County Superior Court Case No. TA088616; 11 (b) trial counsel Mawuli Bakari, including his investigators or staff, in 12 connection with his representation of Petitioner in People v. Williams, Los 13 Angeles County Superior Court Case No. TA088616; (c) post-verdict counsel 14 Andy A. Miri and/or Lawrence R. Young, including each of their 15 investigators or staff, in connection with their representation of Petitioner in 16 People v. Williams, Los Angeles County Superior Court Case No. TA088616; 17 (d) appellate attorney Mark S. Givens, including his staff, in connection with 18 his representation of Petitioner on direct state appeal in People v. Williams, 19 California Court of Appeal Case No. B209510; and/or (e) habeas counsel, 20 Paul McCarthy and/or Robert J. Beles, including either of their staff, in 21 connection with their representation of Petitioner in the instant habeas action. 22 In addition, the parties anticipate some testimony at the evidentiary hearing 23 will relate to the documents and materials referenced above, and, 24 subsequently, anticipate the transcript of the hearing and the parties’ post- 25 hearing briefs submitted to the Court will also reference the documents and 26 materials described in this paragraph. 27 2) 28 received from the persons identified in paragraph 1 pursuant to the Joint The parties stipulate and agree that any and all documents or materials 2 1 Discovery Stipulation are confidential, privileged, or both, and may otherwise 2 contain private information for which special protection from public 3 disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation 4 may be warranted. Any testimony at the evidentiary hearing divulging or 5 revealing confidential and/or privileged information, including the transcript 6 of such testimony, shall also be accorded special protection from public 7 disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation. 8 The parties further agree and stipulate that any and all of the following 9 documents or materials are not confidential or privileged and are not protected 10 by this Protective Order: any and all documents or materials that were 11 available to or in the possession of the prosecution, law enforcement, or 12 Respondent, before the filing of the Joint Discovery Stipulation, and any and 13 all documents that were publicly filed or otherwise disclosed before the filing 14 of the Joint Discovery Stipulation. 15 3) 16 used only for purposes of litigating this habeas action. The protected 17 documents or materials must not be disclosed to persons other than: All privileged documents or materials produced in this action may be 18 a) Counsel for the parties and all members of the parties’ legal 19 teams, including, but not limited to, paralegal, investigative, support, 20 stenographic, clerical, and secretarial staff, and related personnel 21 regularly employed by counsel referred to in subparagraph (a) above, 22 but no confidential or identifying information relating to the victims 23 and/or witnesses shall be disclosed to Petitioner; 24 b) 25 reporters engaged in such proceedings as are necessarily incidental to 26 preparation for the trial of this action; and 27 c) 28 for the purpose of this litigation. The Court and Court personnel, including stenographic Expert witnesses designated by counsel for the parties solely 3 1 4) Except as permitted by Paragraph 3, and excluding the documents 2 designated as unprotected or unprivileged in Paragraph 2, disclosure of the 3 contents of the documents and the documents themselves shall not be made to 4 any other persons or agencies, including, but not limited to, prosecutorial 5 agencies and law enforcement personnel, without the Court’s order. 6 5) 7 blanket protection of protected documents and that the protection it affords 8 from public disclosure and use outside the litigation of this federal habeas 9 action extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to The parties acknowledge that this Protective Order does not confer 10 confidential or privileged treatment under California or federal law. In other 11 words, an unprivileged document or item does not become privileged or 12 confidential by virtue of this Protective Order. The parties further 13 acknowledge that this Protective Order does not entitle them to file 14 confidential information under seal. Each party will comply with Local Rule 15 79-5 if the party seeks to file any document or material under seal. It is the 16 intent of the parties that information will not be designated as confidential or 17 otherwise protected for tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated 18 without a good faith belief that it has been maintained in a confidential, non- 19 public manner. 20 6) 21 shall be clearly designated as such by labeling the document or material in a 22 manner that does not prevent reading the text of the document or otherwise 23 viewing the material. 24 7) 25 are filed with this Court’s permission, they shall be submitted in a manner 26 reflecting their confidential nature and designed to ensure that the privileged 27 material will not become part of the public record. Testimony from the 28 evidentiary hearing relating to privileged matters shall be clearly designated Privileged documents and testimony relating to privileged matters If privileged documents or documents containing privileged matters 4 1 as such by marking the transcripts of the proceeding. The parties may seek 2 Court approval to file under seal any pleading or other papers served on 3 opposing counsel, or filed or lodged with the Court that contains or reveals 4 the substantive content of the privileged matter. The filing shall include a 5 separate caption page that includes the following confidentiality notice or its 6 equivalent. If physical documents or materials are filed with the Court, they 7 shall be filed with the Clerk of this Court in sealed envelopes prominently 8 marked with the caption of the case and the following confidentiality notice: 9 TO BE FILED UNDER SEAL 10 THIS ITEM CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO A 11 PROTECTIVE ORDER AND IS NOT TO BE OPENED NOR ITS 12 CONTENTS DISPLAYED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT COURT ORDER. 13 8) 14 any documents filed in accordance with the above. Insofar as reasonably 15 feasible, only confidential portions of the filings shall be under seal; and the 16 parties shall tailor their documents to limit, as much as is practicable, the 17 quantity of material that is to be filed under seal. When a pleading or 18 document contains only a limited amount of privileged content, a party may 19 file a complete copy under seal and at the same time file on the public record 20 an additional, redacted version of the document, blocking out the limited 21 matter comprising the confidential portions. 22 9) 23 action, and related testimony by Petitioner or members of Petitioner’s trial 24 team at the evidentiary hearing in this case, does not constitute a waiver of 25 Petitioner’s rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the United States 26 Constitution in the event of any retrial. 27 Petitioner’s disclosure of documents from trial counsel’s file in this /// 28 The Clerk of the Court is directed to maintain the confidentiality of /// 5 1 10) This Protective Order shall survive the final disposition for this action 2 and shall remain in full force and effect after conclusion of all proceedings 3 herein, and the Court shall have continuing jurisdiction to enforce its terms. 4 SO STIPULATED: 5 6 Dated: June 29, 2021 ROB BONTA Attorney General of California LANCE E. WINTERS Chief Assistant Attorney General SUSAN SULLIVAN PITHEY Senior Assistant Attorney General XIOMARA COSTELLO Deputy Attorney General 7 8 9 10 11 /s/ Taylor Nguyen TAYLOR NGUYEN Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Respondent 12 13 14 CUAUHTÉMOC ORTEGA Federal Public Defender 15 16 17 /s/ Moriah S. Radin MORIAH S. RADIN Deputy Federal Public Defender Attorneys for Petitioner 18 19 20 21 22 IT IS SO ORDERED: Dated: June 30, 2021 The Honorable Rozella A. Oliver United States Magistrate Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28 6

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?