Carpenter v. Davis, Director TDCJ-CID
Filing
178
ORDER ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE: The Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the Magistrate's Recommendation (Doc. 177 ) and GRANTS Petitioner's Motion for Payment for Expert Services (Doc. 172 ) in an amount up to $7,500.00. (Ordered by Judge Jane J. Boyle on 8/18/2017) (sss)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
DAVID LYNN CARPENTER,
Petitioner,
v.
LORIE DAVIS, Director
Texas Department of Criminal Justice,
Correctional Institutions Division
Respondent.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
NO. 3:02-CV-1145-B
(Death Penalty Case)
ORDER ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES
MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On August 9, 2017, Petitioner David Lynn Carpenter filed his Motion for Payment for Expert
Services pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3599(f). Doc. 172. In light of the impending evidentiary hearing
and the lack of response to Petitioner’s attempt to confer with Respondent regarding the Motion,
Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver shortened the time for Respondent to file a response to
Petitioner’s Motion. Doc. 173. The following day, Respondent filed a Notice that it takes “no
position” on the Motion. Doc. 176. Therefore, on August 17, 2017, Judge Toliver found that the
requested funding was reasonable and necessary for Petitioner to present his claims at the evidentiary
hearing presently scheduled for October 10, 2017, and recommended that this Court grant
Petitioner’s Motion. Doc. 177.
Therefore, having considered the Motion, the law, and the Magistrate’s recommendation,
and in light of Respondent taking no position on the Motion, the Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS
the Magistrate’s Recommendation (Doc. 177) and GRANTS Petitioner’s Motion for Payment for
Expert Services (Doc. 172) in an amount up to $7,500.00.
SO ORDERED.
SIGNED: August 18, 2017.
___________________________________
JANE J. BOYLE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
-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?