Jackson v. Doe et al
Filing
157
ORDER granting 151 Motion for Plaintiff to Wear Restraints. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 3/6/14. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
8
***
9
ALFONSO JACKSON,
10
Plaintiff,
11
v.
12
JOHN DOE, et al.,
13
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
3:10-CV-00771-LRH-WGC
ORDER
14
15
Before the Court is Defendants Justin Chenault, Charles Kirchen, Reuben Lajda, Jason
16
Marshall, and Tom Stubbs’ (collectively “Defendants”) Motion for Alfonso Jackson (“Jackson”) to
17
Wear Restraints at Trial. Doc. #151.1 Jackson filed an Opposition (Doc. #155), to which
18
Defendants replied (Doc. #156).
19
The Court accepts Defendants’ representations as to the legitimate and substantiated
20
security concerns related to Jackson and the associated necessity of restraints during trial in this
21
matter. Accordingly, the Court finds that it is appropriate to order Jackson to wear ankle restraints
22
that are attached to the floor and an electronic stun belt under his clothing so that it is not visible or
23
otherwise apparent to a jury. The Court further finds that this is the least restrictive means
24
available to balance Jackson’s interest in presenting his case to a jury in a fair and unbiased manner
25
with Defendants and the Court’s interest in maintaining the security and decorum of the courtroom.
26
1
Refers to the Court’s docket number.
1
2
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Jackson to Wear Restraints at
Trial (Doc. #151) is GRANTED.
3
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Jackson shall wear ankle restraints that are attached to the
4
floor and an electronic stun belt under his clothing so that it is not visible or otherwise apparent to a
5
jury.
6
IT IS SO ORDERED.
7
DATED this 6th day of March, 2014.
8
9
10
__________________________________
LARRY R. HICKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?