Gapen v. Bobby
Filing
20
ORDER - Respondent has indicated his intention to photograph the physical evidence in this case. The Court declines to permit removal of the physical evidence from its present containers for photographing because such removal poses risk of contributi on of deterioration of evidence. See House v. Bell, 547 U.S. 518 (2006). The Court will reconsider its ruling upon a motion from Respondent and for good cause shown or with the consent of Petitioner's counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 3/16/2009. (kopf1, )
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
LARRY GAPEN, Petitioner, - vs DAVID BOBBY, Warden, Respondent. : : Case No. 3:08-cv-280 District Judge Walter Herbert Rice Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz
ORDER
Respondent has indicated his intention to photograph the physical evidence in this case. The Court declines to permit removal of the physical evidence from its present containers for photographing because such removal poses risk of contribution of deterioration of evidence. See House v. Bell, 547 U.S. 518 (2006). The Court will reconsider its ruling upon a motion from Respondent and for good cause shown or with the consent of Petitioner's counsel. March 16, 2009. s/ Michael R. Merz United States Magistrate Judge
]]>
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?
