Marshall v. Suey et al

Filing 59

ORDER Denying as moot 47 Plaintiff's Motion to View Video Evidence. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 9/29/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - EDS)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

GEORGE L. MARSHALL,

8

Case No. 2:12-cv-01710-LDG-PAL
Plaintiff,

9

v.

10

ORDER

R.SUEY, et al.,

11

(Mtn to View Evidence – Dkt. #47)

Defendants.

12
13

This matter is before the court on Plaintiff George Marshall’s Motion to View Video

14

Evidence (Dkt. #47). No response to the Motion was filed, and the time for filing one has

15

expired. The court has considered the Motion.

16

Marshall is a former prisoner proceeding in this civil rights action pro se and in forma

17

pauperis. In addition to other constitutional claims, Marshall’s Second Amended Complaint

18

(Dkt. #32) alleges that Defendants deprived him of outdoor exercise and out-of-cell recreation

19

during a twenty-five day period he was housed in the administrative segregation unit at Clark

20

County Detention Center (“CCDC”).1 The Motion represents that Marshall served requests for

21

production of documents on Defendants, and Defendants produced, inter alia, responsive video

22

footage of the recreation yard for housing unit 5 E/F at CCDC for the dates Marshall requested.

23

The Motion asserts that Nevada Department of Corrections (“NDOC”) has a policy prohibiting

24

inmates from receiving videos. Marshall represents he needs to view the video to show that

25

during his time in segregation, he was not permitted to use the recreation yard on September 12

26

or 17, 2012, as Defendants claim in their Opposition (Dkt. #34) to Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial

27
1

28

After this case was filed, Plaintiff was incarcerated in High Desert State Prison. See
Notice of Change of Address (Dkt. #3). He has since been released See Notice of Change of
Address (Dkt. #57).

1

Summary Judgment (Dkt. #25). Marshall requests the court enter an order allowing him to

2

receive the video and provide him the means to view it. Plaintiff has attached an Inmate Request

3

Form dated June 3, 2014, in which the corrections staff responded that Marshall needs a court

4

order permitting him to do so.

5

Plaintiff is no longer incarcerated in NDOC custody and there is therefore no longer any

6

rneed for an order directed to NDOC.

7

Accordingly,

8
9
10

See Notice of Change of Address (Dkt. #57).

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to View Video Evidence (Dkt. #47) is
DENIED as MOOT.
Dated this 29th day of September, 2014.

11
12
____________________________________
PEGGY A. LEEN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-