Watson v. Thaler et al

Filing 54

ORDER denying 50 Motion for Production of Documents. Respondent is ORDERED to furnish Petitioner with copies of the additional materials listed in the Court's Order to Expand the Record (DE 43) no later than July 8, 2013.(Signed by Magistrate Judge Jason B. Libby) Parties notified.(mserpa, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
JONATHAN HARRIS WATSON,

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Petitioner,
VS.
RICK THALER, et al,
Respondents.

CIVIL NO. 2:12-CV-349

ORDER
Petitioner is a state inmate currently incarcerated at the Hughes Unit in Gatesville,
Texas, who has filed a habeas petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging a parole
revocation proceeding. (D.E. 1). Pending is his Motion to Compel the Production of
Documents related to his disciplinary proceeding. (D.E. 50).
Motion to Compel was denied. (D.E. 25)

Petitioner’s previous

After denying Petitioner’s prior motion for

discovery, the Court ordered Respondent to submit additional materials relevant to this
litigation to expand the record. (D.E. 43).
A habeas petitioner is generally not entitled to discovery. Rather, “Rule 6 of the
Rules Governing § 2254 cases permits discovery only if and only to the extent that the
district court finds good cause.” Murphy v. Johnson, 205 F.3d 809, 814 (5th Cir. 2000)
(emphasis added); see also United States v. Webster, 392 F.3d 787, 801 (5th Cir. 2004)
(“A habeas petitioner may ‘invoke the process of discovery available under the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure if, and to the extent that, the judge in the exercise of his
1/2

discretion and for good cause shown grants leave to do so, but not otherwise.’”) (citation
omitted). The Fifth Circuit has explained that “[i]n order to establish good cause, the
petitioner must demonstrate that ‘a factual dispute, if resolved in the petitioner’s favor,
would entitle him to relief and the state has not afforded the petitioner a full and fair
evidentiary hearing.’” Lave v. Dretke, 416 F.3d 372, 381 (5th Cir. 2005) (quoting Ward
v. Whitley, 21 F.3d 1355, 1367 (5th Cir. 1994)).
To the extent the Court’s previous order was unclear to the Respondent, the
Respondent shall and is hereby ORDERED to furnish Petitioner with copies of the
additional materials listed in the Court’s Order to Expand the Record (D.E. 43) no later
than July 8, 2013. Petitioner then has a right to admit or deny the correctness of the
additional matters submitted by Respondent pursuant to Rule 7(c) of the rules governing
§ 2254 cases. 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner’s renewed Motion for Production of
Documents (D.E. 50) is otherwise DENIED.
ORDERED this 28th day of June, 2013.

___________________________________
Jason B. Libby
United States Magistrate Judge

2/2