ORDER REGARDING PETITIONER'S LEGAL FILES re 31 - Signed by JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 2/13/2017. (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII
LARRY JAMES ORTIZ,
CIV. NO. 16 000259 SOM/KSC
PETITIONER’S LEGAL FILES
ORDER REGARDING PETITIONER’S LEGAL FILES
On February 13, 2017, the court held a second
hearing on Respondent’s contention that Petitioner’s
habeas corpus action brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 was
It is apparent that there is some confusion
regarding the court’s previous orders and the parties’
responsibilities in supporting their positions.
First, while the court has no objection to
Petitioner’s presence in court, the court did not, at
the time it scheduled the Preliminary Hearing for
February 6, 2017, expect that Petitioner would be flown
from Arizona to Hawaii to attend that hearing in
See ECF No. 21.
To the contrary, pursuant to
the Local Rules for the District of Hawaii, the court
expected Petitioner to appear through video or
See Local Rule LR99.16.1.
Petitioner’s continued presence in Hawaii is not
required, but the court leaves that issue to
This court only notes that it
never required Petitioner’s physical presence in Hawaii
and has conducted many other hearings with prisoners
who have participated by telephone or videoconference.
Second, having brought Petitioner to Hawaii,
Respondent should have ensured that Petitioner’s legal
documents accompanied him.
Neither Respondent nor
Assistant Warden Ben Griego adequately explained why
Petitioner was given some but not all of his legal
documents when he was transported to Hawaii.
does not know whether Petitioner requires all of his
boxes now in storage in Arizona, but his complaint that
he is unable to support his equitable tolling claims
without his documents appears reasonable.
Accordingly, while Petitioner remains in Hawaii,
which the court is not requiring, he must have access
to his legal files.
Respondent is ORDERED to ensure
that prison officials deliver Petitioner’s legal
materials to him in Hawaii on or before February 27,
To be clear, prison officials need not send all
of Petitioner’s property to Hawaii.
legal materials are required.
Rather, only his
If, however, separating
Petitioner’s legal and nonlegal property might give
prison authorities unauthorized access to Petitioner’s
privileged or confidential materials outside of
Petitioner’s presence, Respondent must (1) notify this
court in writing within three days of this Order, and
(2) propose a solution to such issue.
Third, if Respondent intends to rely on statements
by prison officials or others, such statements must be
filed under penalty of perjury.
If Respondent intends
to rely on records, they must be properly
See Rule 7, Rules Governing Section
2254 Cases in the United States District Courts.
The continued hearing set for March 17, 2017, will
address the timeliness of Petitioner’s request for
relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
Petitioner appears to
be arguing that the limitations period should be
equitably tolled, so Respondent is directed to address
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii; February 13, 2017.
/s/ Susan Oki Mollway
Susan Oki Mollway
United States District Judge
Ortiz v. Taylor, 1:16-00259 SOM/KSC; OSCs Hab 2016 Ortiz som 16 259 (2d hrg
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?