KEVIN JAMES LISLE v. E.K. MCDANIEL

Filing 382

ORDER that Dr. Piasecki is appointed to determine whether Petitioner is competent to waive further proceedings in this case and whether his waiver is knowing, intelligent and voluntary. Signed by Chief Judge Miranda M. Du on 11/4/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5

***

6

KEVIN JAMES LISLE,

7
8
9
10

Case No. 2:03-cv-1006-MMD-DJA
Petitioner,

ORDER

v.
WILLIAM GITTERE, et al.,
Respondents.

11
12
13

In this capital habeas corpus action, Petitioner Kevin James Lisle has filed, pro se,

14

a motion to waive further proceedings and voluntarily dismiss this action. (ECF No. 359.)

15

The Court has determined that Petitioner’s motion raises the questions of whether

16

Petitioner is competent to make such a waiver and whether his waiver is knowing,

17

intelligent and voluntary, and the Court has determined that a mental health examination

18

of Petitioner is necessary in order to resolve those questions. (See ECF No. 358 (Order

19

entered June 20, 2019).) Respondents and the Federal Public Defender (“FPD”) entered

20

a stipulation establishing a procedure for the mental health examination (ECF No. 362),

21

which the Court approved (ECF No. 363). In accordance with the stipulation,

22

Respondents and the FPD have conferred and have attempted to agree upon an expert,

23

but unable to agree, they have submitted names of potential experts, along with

24

information about those candidates. (ECF Nos. 367, 377.) In addition, each side has

25

submitted objections to experts proposed by the other. (ECF Nos. 371,373, 380.)

26

The Court has considered the material submitted by Respondents and the FPD

27

regarding the potential experts they have nominated, as well as the arguments and

28

objections that the parties have made in their filings and at the telephonic status
1

1

conference on August 23, 2019. The Court recognizes and appreciates the efforts of the

2

FPD and counsel for Respondents with respect to this matter.

3

The Court will appoint Dr. Melissa Piasecki, whose experience best satisfies the

4

Court’s

5

prosecution/respondent side and the defendant/petitioner side in criminal and habeas

6

cases, alleviating any concern that she may favor one side or the other before conducting

7

her examination. The Court also observes that Respondents originally nominated Dr.

8

Piasecki, and that, in the parties’ October 16, 2019 filing, the FPD states that “Dr. Piasecki

9

most closely meets the criteria set forth by this Court in its order of September 6, 2019,”

10

concerns.

Dr.

Piasecki

has

done

forensic

work

for

both

the

and “agrees with the resubmission of Dr. Piasecki’s name.” (ECF No. 377 at 2.)

11

Dr. Piasecki’s work will proceed as outlined in the stipulation filed by the parties on

12

July 3, 2019, and approved by the Court on July 5, 2019. (ECF Nos. 362, 363.) The Court

13

reminds the parties that they represented in the stipulation that the expert’s report could

14

be completed by December 31, 2019.

15

It is therefore ordered that Dr. Piasecki is appointed to determine whether

16

Petitioner is competent to waive further proceedings in this case and whether his waiver

17

is knowing, intelligent and voluntary.

18
19

DATED THIS 4th day of November 2019.

20
21
22

MIRANDA M. DU
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28
2