Defreitas v. United States Of America
ORDER denying 10 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge G. R. Smith on 2/17/17. (jlm)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
WESLEY ELDER DeFREITAS,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Movant Wesley DeFreitas seek a copy of “the search warrant
executed on May 19th 2014” at his business, Warriors Gear, for use in his
28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. Doc. 10. Though he explains that the document
was mentioned by a witness at his Fed. R. Cr. P. 11 plea hearing, he does
not specify why he needs the document.
After a § 2255 motion or habeas petition is filed, a petitioner is
generally “not entitled to discovery as a matter of ordinary course” and
must instead demonstrate “good cause.” Arthur v. Allen , 459 F.3d 1310,
1310 (11th Cir. 2006); see also Rules 1(b) and 6(a) of the Rules Governing
§ 2254 Cases; Rule 6(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings ;
United States v. Hollis , 2010 WL 892196 (D. Ak. Mar. 10, 2010) (denying
document unsealing without a relevancy showing because such production
would just be a "fishing expedition for the sake of turning up new potential
DeFreitas has not made any need-based showing for this document
beyond his vague, conclusory belief that it may be of some use to him. See
doc. 10. His request is therefore denied. See Hands v. United States , 2016
WL 4995074 at *3 (E.D.N.C. Sept. 19, 2016).
Accordingly, Wesley DeFreitas’ motion for a copy of the search
warrant executed at Warriors Gear is DENIED . Doc. 10.
SO ORDERED, this 17th day of February, 2017.
LTNI= STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
SOUTFtERI'1 DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
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?