Johnson, et al v. Runnel, et al

Filing 289

ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 6/30/2015. On 6/25/2015, plaintiff submitted 288 Objections to Court's 285 Order. It appears plaintiff again objects to his and the incarcerated witnesses having to appear in person at Trial. The Objection is noted and the Request is again DENIED. Court will issue necessary Writs to ensure their appearance at Trial. Plaintiff also objects to having "to submit (5) more Motions with Affidavits of plaintiff's selection" of in carcerated witnesses to testify, and requests further clarification. Plaintiff may submit one motion stating which five witnesses are to testify. Together with that Motion, plaintiff may either refile necessary Affidavits, specific to five witnesses, or clearly reference which are correct Affidavits already filed in "plaintiff's 282 Motion / Affidavit Re: Attendance of Incarcerated Witnesses to Appear at Jury Trial". Plaintiff shall file such a Motion and/or Affidavits within 7 days of date of this Order. (Marciel, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12

VANCE EDWARD JOHNSON,

13
14
15
16

No. 2:04-cv-00776-TLN-EFB-P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

D.L. RUNNELS, et al.,
Defendants.

17
18

On June 2, 2015, the Court issued an order in response to Plaintiff’s motions seeking to

19

obtain the appearance of numerous incarcerated witnesses at trial, and for both him and the

20

incarcerated witnesses to appear at trial via video or telephonic conference. (ECF No. 285.)

21

The June 2, 2015, Order found that the number of witnesses proposed by Plaintiff would

22

be an undue waste of time and needlessly present cumulative evidence to the jury in violation of

23

Fed. R. Evid. 403. The Order further provided that Plaintiff should submit a motion, with

24

accompanying affidavits, to obtain the attendance of a maximum of five incarcerated witnesses at

25

trial. The Court also denied Plaintiff’s motions for him and the incarcerated witnesses to appear

26

via video or telephonic conference.

27

On June 25, 2015, Plaintiff submitted objections to the Court’s Order. (ECF No. 288.) It

28

appears Plaintiff again objects to his and the incarcerated witnesses having to appear in person at
1

1

trial. The objection is noted and the request is again denied; the Court will issue the necessary

2

writs to ensure their appearance at trial.

3

Plaintiff also objects to having “to submit (5) more Motions with Affidavits of Plaintiff’s

4

selection” of the incarcerated witnesses to testify, and requests further clarification. Plaintiff may

5

submit one motion stating which five witnesses are to testify. Together with that motion, Plaintiff

6

may either refile the necessary affidavits, specific to the five witnesses, or clearly reference which

7

are the correct affidavits already filed in “Plaintiff’s Motion / Affidavit Re: Attendance of

8

Incarcerated Witnesses to Appear At Jury Trial,” ECF No. 282. Plaintiff shall file such a motion

9

and/or affidavits within 7 days of the date of this order.

10
11

Dated: June 30, 2015

12
13
14
15

Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2