Candler v. Santa Rita County Jail Watch Commander et al

Filing 68

Discovery Order re: Docket No. 66 Joint Letter. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 9/4/2014. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/4/2014)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

MARK ANTHONY CANDLER,

Case No. 11-cv-01992-CW (MEJ)

Plaintiff,
8

DISCOVERY ORDER

v.

Re: Dkt. No. 66

9
SANTA RITA COUNTY JAIL WATCH
COMMANDER, et al.,

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

Defendants.

12
13

On May 21, 2014, the Court granted Plaintiff Mark Anthony Candler’s request for

14

production of a Memorandum Re: Classification of Inmates, but permitted Defendants to redact

15

any information that identifies inmates other than Plaintiff and any details that would permit

16

Plaintiff to figure out the identity of other inmates or adverse witnesses, as well as any information

17

which would present a grave security risk to the staff and inmates. Discovery Order at 8-9, Dkt.

18

No. 63. The Court also granted Plaintiff’s motion to compel a further response from Sgt. Snider

19

as to: (1) any incidents where Sgt. Snider determined that Plaintiff was an immediate threat to

20

other inmates during the period of his incarceration as a pretrial detainee at the Santa Rita County

21

Jail; and (2) any incidents where Sgt. Snider determined that Plaintiff was an immediate danger to

22

Santa Rita Jail security during the period of his incarceration as a pretrial detainee at the Santa

23

Rita County Jail. Id. at 9.

24

Now before the Court is a follow up dispute letter from the parties, filed September 3,

25

2014. Dkt. No. 66. In the letter, Plaintiff again requests that the Court order Defendants to

26

produce an unredacted version of the memo, arguing that the names “would show this court or

27

jury, that once the D.A. Memo was issued, the due process rights that were clearly established in

28

Hewitt v. Helms (1983) were meaningless and a ‘pretext for indefinite confinement’ in isolation.”

1

Jt. Ltr. at 2. Plaintiff also requests that the Court order Defendants to provide a further

2

supplemental response of Sgt. Snider. Id. at 7.

3

Upon review of the parties’ arguments, the Court ORDERS as follows:

4

1)

For the reasons stated in its previous Order, Plaintiff’s request for production of the

5

unredacted memo is DENIED, except that Defendants shall produce a version with

6

Plaintiff’s name unredacted; and

7
8
9

2)

As Sgt. Snider had no role in Plaintiff’s housing assignment, Plaintiff’s request for
a supplemental response is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

Dated: September 4, 2014
______________________________________
MARIA-ELENA JAMES
United States Magistrate Judge

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

MARK ANTHONY CANDLER,

Case No. 11-cv-01992-CW (MEJ)

Plaintiff,
5
v.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

6
7

SANTA RITA COUNTY JAIL WATCH
COMMANDER, et al.,

8

Defendants.

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.
District Court, Northern District of California.
That on 9/4/2014, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said
copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing
said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle
located in the Clerk's office.

13
14
15
16

Mark Anthony Candler ID: AF7322
Centinela State Prison
C-2-134
P.O. Box 921
Imperial, CA 92251

17
18

Dated: 9/4/2014

19
20
21

Richard W. Wieking
Clerk, United States District Court

22
23
24

By:________________________
Chris Nathan, Deputy Clerk to the
Honorable MARIA-ELENA JAMES

25
26
27
28
3