Clark, et al v. State of California, et al

Filing 436

ORDER. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on April 27, 2010. (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/27/2010)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CLARK, ET AL, Plaintiffs, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL, Defendants. / No. C 96-1486 CRB ORDER REGARDING WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS AD TESTIFICANDUM This Court is in receipt of Plaintiffs' request that it vacate the previously issued writs of habeas corpus ad testificandum. This Court is also in receipt of the Defendants' partial opposition to the request. As for the writs which Defendants do not oppose vacating, those writs are hereby VACATED. As for the three remaining prisoners (Phillip Houseknecht, Ronald Blake, and Randy Wright), Plaintiffs are ordered to present a declaration from appropriately qualified medical personnel, attesting to the fact that transportation of these three individual witnesses would be deleterious to their mental and/or physical health. Without such a declaration, Plaintiffs' request will be denied. Upon receipt of such a declaration, however, the remaining writs will be VACATED. At this point, if Defendants are able to provide the necessary equipment to enable testimony by videoconference, such testimony will be permitted. However, if Defendants are unable to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 provide such equipment, Plaintiffs will be permitted to present the witnesses' testimony via their previously recorded depositions. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 27, 2010 CHARLES R. BREYER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE G:\CRBALL\1996\1486\Order re writs ad testificandum.wpd 2

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?