Calloway v. Veal et al

Filing 142

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 138 Motion for Attendance of Incarcerated Witnesses at Trial signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 03/18/2014. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

JAMISI JERMAINE CALLOWAY,

11

Plaintiff,

12
13
14

vs.
C/O W. HAYWARD AND C/O J.
OAKS, et al.,

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF=S
MOTION FOR ATTENDANCE OF
INCARCERATED WITNESSES AT
TRIAL
(Doc. 138.)

Defendants.

15
16

1:08-cv-01896-LJO-GSA-PC

I.

BACKGROUND

17

This is a civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983 by Jamisi Jermaine

18

Calloway, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. Plaintiff is presently

19

housed at the California Health Care Facility in Stockton, California. This case is scheduled

20

for jury trial to commence on April 22, 2014 at 8:30 a.m. before District Judge Lawrence J.

21

O=Neill.

22

This case now proceeds with the Third Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff on

23

October 5, 2009, against defendants C/O W. Hayward and C/O J. Oaks, for use of excessive

24

force in violation of the Eighth Amendment, based on an incident occurring on May 7, 2008 at

25

Corcoran State Prison (CSP) in Corcoran, California. (Doc. 20.)

26

On February 18, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion for the attendance of incarcerated

27

witnesses at trial. (Doc. 138.) On March 10, 2014, Defendants filed an opposition to the

28

motion. (Doc. 139.)
1

1

II.

MOTION FOR ATTENDANCE OF INMATE WITNESSES

2

In the Court=s Second Scheduling Order of January 13, 2014, Plaintiff was advised that

3

before the Court will issue an order to transport an incarcerated witness to trial, Plaintiff must

4

file a motion stating the name, address, and prison identification number of such witness, and

5

submit a declaration showing that the witness is willing to testify and has actual knowledge of

6

relevant facts. (Doc. 131 at 2-3.) Plaintiff was advised that a prospective witness’s actual

7

knowledge of relevant facts can be shown by “a declaration signed under penalty of perjury by

8

the prospective witness in which the witness describes the relevant facts to which the

9

prospective witness was an eye or ear witness.” (Id. at 3:17-18.)

10

Plaintiff’s Motion

11

Plaintiff requests the attendance at trial of nine inmate witnesses who are currently

12

incarcerated at CSP: Alton R. Garrett (J-05277), Suane Livas (AC-9131), Relaun Deadmon (D-

13

88206), Roderick Daniel (P-18184), Orlando Archuleta (G-41555), Troy D. Maybon, Jr. (V-

14

70737), Roy Bonner (AF-4261), Michael Webb (D-90567), and William B. Brown (T-58106).

15

Plaintiff asserts that “[e]ach named witness ha[s] pertinent information of Corcoran corruption,

16

racial discrimination, malious (sic) sadicted (sic) assaults and deaths while being housed

17

inadequate[ly].” (Motion, Doc. 138 at 1:26-28.) Plaintiff states that through these witnesses’

18

testimony, he intends to show corruption, disregard of prisoners’ lives, racial discrimination,

19

and use of excessive force by correctional officers when inmates demand adequate medical

20

care. Plaintiff has submitted declarations by each of the prospective witnesses, as follow.

21

Alton R. Garrett’s declaration, signed on May 13, 2013, concerns inadequate medical

22

care received at CSP by the declarant and other unnamed inmates, due to deliberate

23

indifference by prison officials and overcrowding. (Declaration of Garrett, Doc. 138 at 8-10.)
Suane Livas’ declaration, signed on May 17, 2013, is the same form declaration as Mr.

24
25

Garrett’s. (Declaration of Livas, Doc. 138 at 11-13.)
Relaun Deadmon’s declaration, signed on May 17, 2013, is the same form declaration

26
27

as Mr. Garrett’s. (Declaration of Deadmon, Doc. 138 at 14-16.)

28

///
2

Roderick Daniel’s declaration, signed on May 17, 2013, is the same form declaration as

1
2

Mr. Garrett’s. (Declaration of Daniel, Doc. 138 at 17-19.)
Orlando Archuleta’s declaration, signed on May 17, 2013, is the same form declaration

3
4

as Mr. Garrett’s. (Declaration of Archuleta, Doc. 138 at 20-22.)

5

Plaintiff submits four declarations by Troy Mabon, Jr. The first declaration, signed on

6

July 11, 2013, concerns events occurring in 2013, in which Jamisi Calloway was refused ice or

7

water pursuant to a “Stage 1 Heat Plan.” (Declaration of Mabon, Doc. 138 at 23.) The second

8

declaration, signed on June 27, 2013, concerns incidents occurring on May 28, 2013 during

9

which Jamisi Calloway’s blood pressure was low and he was not given ice “to bring his body

10

temperature down,” and on June 21, 2013, when Mabon’s cell was contaminated by Calloway’s

11

blood. (Declaration of Mabon, Doc. 138 at 34-35.) The third declaration, signed on June 22,

12

2013, concerns an incident occurring on May 18, 2013, during which Mabon suffered an

13

asthma attack and was taken to the hospital. (Declaration of Mabon, Doc. 138 at 36-37.) The

14

fourth declaration, signed on July 16, 2013, concerns inadequate medical care and retaliation

15

against Jamisi Calloway at CSP in 2013. (Declaration of Mabon, Doc. 138 at 38.)

16

William E. Brown’s declaration, signed on July 27, 2013, concerns an incident

17

occurring on May 18, 2013, during which inmate Troy Mabon suffered a seizure and was

18

assaulted by C/O L. Cahlander. (Declaration of Brown, Doc. 138 at 24-26.)

19

Plaintiff submits two declarations by Michael Webb. The first declaration, which is

20

undated, concerns an incident in which Webb witnessed the maltreatment of an inmate who

21

was assaulted after he fell backwards, hit his head on the pavement, and “start[ed] shaking out

22

of control.” (Declaration of Webb, Doc. 138 at 27.) The second declaration, which is undated,

23

concerns incidents occurring in 2012, during which Webb was harassed and assaulted by C/O

24

L. Cahlander. (Declaration of Webb, Doc. 138 at 28-30.)

25

William Roy Bonner’s declaration, signed on July 1, 2013, concerns an incident

26

occurring on April 11, 2013, during which Bonner was assaulted by Sergeant N. Scaife and

27

C/O M. Holguin. (Declaration of Bonner, Doc. 138 at 31-33.)

28

///
3

1

Defendants’ Opposition

2

Defendants oppose Plaintiff’s motion, arguing that none of the listed witnesses has any

3

relevant information regarding the sole remaining issue in this litigation. Defendants also argue

4

that Plaintiff did not previously identify any of these witnesses under Rule 37(c).

5

Discussion

6

As Defendants have argued, none of the prospective witnesses’ declarations submitted

7

by Plaintiff demonstrates actual knowledge of relevant facts by the witness. Plaintiff’s case

8

now proceeds only against defendants C/O W. Hayward and C/O J. Oaks, for use of excessive

9

force in violation of the Eighth Amendment, based on an incident occurring on May 7, 2008 at

10

CSP. None of the prospective witnesses has described personal knowledge of facts relevant to

11

the excessive force incident of May 7, 2008. Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion shall be denied.

12

III.

13
14

CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion for the attendance of incarcerated witnesses,

filed on February 18, 2014, is DENIED.

15
16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

March 18, 2014

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22

23
24
25
26
27
28
4