Sanders, et al v. Ylst, et al

Filing 326

ORDER signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 4/20/2009 DENYING 324 Motion for an order directing Respondent to submit evidence. (Lundstrom, T)

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 P e titio n e r Ronald L. Sanders ("Sanders") filed a motion seeking an order d ir e c tin g Respondent Robert Wong ("the Warden") to submit evidence whether h a r m was caused by the Warden's failure to comply with the Protective Order in th is matter, with respect to the initial filing of the Warden's Post-Evidentiary H e a r in g Brief and Proposed Findings of Fact/Conclusions of Law, on April 10, 2 0 0 9 . Doc. 322. At the Warden's request, the document was converted to sealed s ta tu s by the Clerk's Office April 13, 2009. S a n d e r s asserts the public filing of the Warden's brief violated the p r o te c tiv e order issued in this matter, and contends the Warden should have the b u r d e n to establish whether there was any injury caused by the violation. In r e s p o n s e to Sanders' motion, the Court undertook an internal inquiry into the vs. R O B E R T WONG, Acting Warden o f San Quentin State Prison, R e s p o n d e n t. R O N A L D L. SANDERS, P e t it i o n e r , ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) C a se No. 1:92-cv-05471-LJO D E A T H PENALTY CASE O r d e r Regarding Petitioner's M o tio n for An Order Directing R e s p o n d e n t to Submit Evidence U N IT E D STATES DISTRICT COURT E A S T E R N DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

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

m a tte r , and determined the Warden's brief had been accessed by at least one p e r s o n not a party to this proceeding. The details revealed by the internal in q u ir y will be disclosed to the parties in a separate order filed under seal. B a s e d on the information disclosed in Sanders' motion, it is clear the public d is c lo s u r e was inadvertent, and no santions hearing will be held. The motion for a n order directing the Warden to submit evidence whether harm was caused by th e failure to comply with the Protective Order is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:

April 20, 2009

/s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill United States District Judge

OreUnsealedBrfSan

2