Slayden v. MCDANIEL et al
Filing
32
ORDER Denying 25 Motion for a complete copy of the record. Signed by Judge Philip M. Pro on 5/18/2012. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
7
8
EMERY SLAYDEN,
9
Petitioner,
10
vs.
11
E.K. McDANIEL, et al.,
12
Respondents.
13
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
/
2:06-cv-0664-PMP-RJJ
ORDER
14
Emery Slayden, a Nevada prisoner, has filed a Motion for Complete Copy of Records
15
(ECF No. 25) in anticipation of a renewed appeal effort on the basis of actual innocence. He
16
thereafter provided a signed copy of the supporting Declaration of Ted L. Gunderson, private
17
investigator of Gunderson and Associates located in Los Angeles, California, (ECF No. 26), dated
18
October 9, 2011. At that time, it came to the Court’s attention that the declarant, Mr. Gunderson,
19
may have deceased. In response to the motion and an order from the Court requesting confirmation
20
of the fact of Mr. Gunderson’s death, respondents have provided an opposition to the motion (ECF
21
No. 30) and evidence that Mr. Gunderson died before the date on which he purportedly signed the
22
declaration in question. See Exhibit 1 to Opposition.
23
Petitioner replied to the opposition (ECF No. 31) asserting that he had not intended to
24
perpetrate a fraud on the Court, as the documents and respondents suggest. Instead he informs the
25
Court that he had been receiving assistance from another inmate, a certain Randall Wiideman, who
26
had prepared the motion. That inmate has also died.
1
2
3
4
In light of the false representations made to the Court, signed by petitioner, whether
drafted by him or not, the motion for a complete copy of the record (ECF No. 25) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 18, 2012
5
6
________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2
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?