Fleming v. Clark

Filing 64

ORDER re (30 in 3:09-cv-01613-BZ) First MOTION to Compel Production of Documents filed by Novender Fleming. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bernard Zimmerman on 11/25/2009. (bzsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/25/2009)

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 27 28 v. NADIA CLARK, et al., Defendant(s). NOVENDER FLEMING, Plaintiff(s), ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

No. C 09-1613 BZ Related Case: C09-4757 BZ ORDER GRANTING FURTHER DISCOVERY FOLLOWING IN CAMERA REVIEW

Having reviewed Appendix A to Officer Clark's affidavit, I conclude that it does contain information whose disclosure could present a risk of danger to a third party. Balancing

this danger against the need for plaintiffs to know the basis for the probable cause determination which lead to the search warrant, I have recast the first two paragraphs of Appendix A to read as follows: Officer Barocio and I were contacted by a resident of the neighborhood regarding a marijuana grow at 1078 55th Street. Based on this information, we proceeded to a location from which we had a clear and unobstructed view of a yard at 1078 55th Street. With a clear and unobstructed view, I 1

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 27 28

observed two marijuana plants standing approximately 6 feet tall. Officer Barocio was able to see 10 - 15 smaller

marijuana plants. This information is produced to Mr. Johnson under an appropriate protective order. Mr. Johnson is to use his

discretion in determining whether he needs to share this information with his clients. If he concludes that he must,

he can only do so after they sign onto the protective order. If the parties have not already entered a protective order, they shall use the model protective order which is on the Court's website at: www.cand.uscourts.gov It is therefore ORDERED that defendants shall produce Appendix A to the warrant application by entirely redacting the first two paragraphs, which have been recast above, and by making the redactions proposed by defendants to the second two paragraphs. For purposes of determining whether there was

probable cause for the warrant, I find that the redacted paragraphs are the substantial equivalent of the actual paragraphs. This Order resolves Document No. 30.

Dated: November 25, 2009 Bernard Zimmerman United States Magistrate Judge
G:\BZALL\-BZCASES\FLEMING v. CLARK\ORDER RE INSPECTION OF DOCUMENTS IN CAMERA.wpd

2