Trujillo v. Lewis et al

Filing 77

ORDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granting 74 Motion Motion to Expand the Record (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/20/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6

SIXTH DISTRICT APPELLATE PROGRAM
Jonathan Grossman 154452
100 N. Winchester Blvd., Suite 310
Santa Clara, CA 95050
[phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorney for Petitioner
Mario Trujillo

7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8
9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

OAKLAND DIVISION

11
12
13
14
15

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING:
Petitioner’s request to expand the record with:

18

(1) Exhibit A to defendant's motion in limine (CT 494-498), attached as exhibit A to the
XX
motion, is ___ granted ___ denied.

20

22

(2) The City of San Rafael's Motion to Quash the Subpoena Duces Tecum (CT 412-423) and
XX
the trial court's order quashing the subpoena (CT 531), attached as exhibit B to the motion, is ___

granted ___ denied.

23
24

(3) Exhibits A through C to defendant's motion in limine (CT 480-493), attached as exhibit
XX
C to the motion, is ___ granted ___ denied.

25
26
27

MOTION TO EXPAND THE
RECORD

GREG LEWIS, Warden,
Respondent.

17

21

[PROPOSED]
ORDER GRANTING

v.

16

19

C 11-00522 JW YGR

MARIO TRUJILLO,
Petitioner,

(4) The transcripts of the jailhouse telephonic telephone calls made by petitioner that were
XX
admitted at the first trial (CT 1036, 10137), attached as exhibit D to the motion, is ___ granted ___
denied.

28
-1-

1
2

(5) The reporter's transcripts of the first trial in People v. Trujillo volumes 9 through 17 is
XX
___ granted and respondent shall file with this court the record. ___ denied.

3

See below.

4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

This Order terminates Dkt. No. 74.

5
6

May 20, 2013
Dated:________________________

7
8
9
10
11
12
13

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
With regard to the last category, Petitioner has made an
insufficient showing of relevance to the issues before the
Court. In light of the fact that the second trial (which is the
one at issue) had a different trial judge and a different jury
than the first, the relevance of the first trial is tenuous at
best.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-