AVILA v. JOHNSON et al

Filing 88

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER granting 37 Petitioner's Motion to Unseal Case; directing Clerk to lift the seal on the case; directing the Clerk to maintain 1 , 4 , 10 , 11 , 23 , 37 , and 41 under seal, Respondents shall file redacted versions of these documents within 30 days of this Order. Signed by Judge Noel L. Hillman on 3/20/2023. (alb, n.m.)

Case 1:18-cv-09422-NLH Document 88 Filed 03/20/23 Page 1 of 4 PageID: 1880

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
______________________________
:
ABDIEL F. AVILA,
:
:
Petitioner,
:
Civ. No. 18-9422 (NLH)
:
v.
:
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
:
:
BRUCE DAVIS,
:
:
Respondent.
:
______________________________:
APPEARANCE:
Abdiel F. Avila
788891C
New Jersey State Prison
PO Box 861
Trenton, NJ 08625
Petitioner Pro se
Grace C. MacAulay, Camden County Prosecutor
Jason Magid, Assistant Prosecutor
Office of the County Prosecutor
200 Federal Street
Camden, NJ 08103
Attorneys for Respondent
HILLMAN, District Judge
Petitioner is proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
Court sealed the entire matter.

Previously, this

See ECF No. 26.

Petitioner filed a motion to unseal this case.

Subsequently,
See ECF No. 37.

In response to Petitioner’s motion, this Court noted that

Case 1:18-cv-09422-NLH Document 88 Filed 03/20/23 Page 2 of 4 PageID: 1881

sealing the entire case may have been overbroad.

See ECF No. 44

at 13.
This Court ordered Respondents to propose a less
restrictive alternative to sealing the entire case, such as
specifically noting what documents already in the record should
remain sealed.

See id. Respondents did so on July 15, 2021

indicating that ECF Nos. 1, 4, 10, 11, 23, 37 and 41 should
remain sealed.

See ECF No. 46.

The parties filed numerous

additional documents, including Respondents’ response to
Petitioner’s habeas petition, after July 15, 2021.
47-56.

See ECF Nos.

The Court requested Respondents to provide an update to

their July 15, 2021 filing indicating what documents, if any,
from ECF Nos. 47-56, they believed also should remain sealed and
why.

ECF No. 57.

Respondents replied that “Respondents’ full

Answer, in particular, Appendix, must remain sealed given the
Appendix contains all of Petitioner’s state filings which are
replete with references to the victim and/or family members as
well as medical evidence/records coupled by the fact, the State
record was sealed and the Appendix contains a large portion of
the State record.”

ECF No. 59.

The parties have continued to

file documents since Respondents’ reply.
“It is well-settled that there exists, in both criminal and
civil cases, a common law public right of access to judicial
proceedings and records.

The public's right of access extends
2

Case 1:18-cv-09422-NLH Document 88 Filed 03/20/23 Page 3 of 4 PageID: 1882

beyond simply the ability to attend open court proceedings.
Rather, it envisions a pervasive common law right to inspect and
copy public records and documents, including judicial records
and documents.”

In re Cendant Corp., 260 F.3d 183, 192 (3d Cir.

2001) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted).

The New

Jersey legislature has recognized a public interest in assisting
the prosecution of crime by protecting victims’ privacy rights.
N.J.S.A. § 52:4B-35 (Crime Victims’ Bill of Rights).

This Court

is extremely mindful of the importance and need to protect the
identity of the victim.

Nevertheless, transparency in judicial

proceedings is also important.

Both interests can be satisfied

if certain protocols are met.
Respondents seek to keep the § 2254 petition, ECF No. 1;
supplemental filing, ECF No. 4; amended petition and exhibits,
ECF Nos. 10 & 11; motion to dismiss, ECF No. 23; motion to
unseal, ECF No. 37; brief in support of the motion to unseal,
ECF No. 41; and Respondents’ full answer and exhibits, ECF No.
56.

The motion to unseal and brief in support do not warrant

remaining under seal and can be redacted to remove identifying
information.

Likewise, the pleadings are integral to a decision

on the merits of Petitioner’s § 2254 proceedings and need to be
publicly accessible in some form.

That the filings may need

significant redaction does not mean that there is no less
restrictive alternative.
3

Case 1:18-cv-09422-NLH Document 88 Filed 03/20/23 Page 4 of 4 PageID: 1883

The Court will grant Petitioner’s motion to unseal the
case.

The Court will keep the identified documents under seal,

but Respondents must submit redacted versions for public filing.
THEREFORE, IT IS on this

20th

day of

March

, 2023

ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion to unseal the case, ECF
No. 37, be, and the same hereby is, GRANTED.

The Clerk shall

lift the seal on the case; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk shall maintain ECF Nos. 1, 4, 10,
11, 23, 37, 41 under seal.

Respondents shall file redacted

versions of these documents within 30 days of this Order; and it
is finally
ORDERED that the Clerk shall send Petitioner a copy of this
Order by regular mail.

s/ Noel L. Hillman
NOEL L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J.

At Camden, New Jersey

4