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
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?