Johnson v. Rankin

Filing 66

MEMORANDUM OPINION - granting document numbers 46 and 50 , motions to seal; the Court ORDERS that Exhibits 4 and 9 to the Plaintiff's memorandum in opposition to the Defendant's motion for summary judgment and Exhibit 1 to theDefendant&# 039;s reply be marked confidential and remain "under seal" with this Court. In addition, the sealed version of Defendant's reply may remain sealed as the modestly redacted public version (ECF No. 53) is adequate to inform the public of the issues presented. Signed by Magistrate Judge Douglas E. Miller and filed on 2/6/12. (jcow, )

UNITED

FOR THE

STATES

DISTRICT

EASTERN DISTRICT

COURT

OF VIRGINIA

Norfolk Division

JERRELL R.

JOHNSON,

Administrator of

The Estate of Kirill Denyakin,

Deceased

Plaintiff,
v.

Civil Action No.

STEPHEN D,

2:llcv415

RANKIN,

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM ORDER

THIS

certain
motion
Rule

DAY

came

documents
for

5.

the

parties

included with

summary

(ECF Nos.

judgment
46

and

1.

On December

(hereafter

Plaintiff,

Kirill

memorandum

Jerrell

Denyakin,

electronically
Defendant's
Document
January

#:
19,

27,

2 011,

R.

for

motion

for

45) .

The

2012.

his

briefing

After

on

the

file

Defendant's
Local

Civil

motions,

Stephen D.

filed

judgment

in

Administrator

a

the

this

of

judgment
filed

in
on

the

a

by

opposition
January
reply

Rankin

motion

"Plaintiff1)/

memorandum

Defendant

to

to

following findings:

counsel,

(hereafter

the

pursuant

Defendant,

summary

summary

motions

reviewing

the

the

Johnson,

deceased
filed

by

separate

seal

and makes

"Defendant"),

accompanying

the

under

50).

Court GRANTS both motions

on

13,

case.
Estate

and
The
of

counsel,
to

the

2 012

{ECF

memorandum

on

2.
his

with

of

The

memorandum

those

because

they

submitted

reply

included

The

are

opposition

Police

items

follows:

to

(VSP)

memorandum

in

Certificate

of

which

was

issued

the

connection

1

also

seeks

Hook's

the

one

4

seek

to

the

The

is

also

Defendant

of

his

9

to

the

on

May

a

Hook.

brief

26,

of

2011,

Milam

and

Science

in

shooting

of

April

of

of

State

consists

Forensic

in

Plaintiff's

Allison

consists

the VSP Agent
of

summary

Virginia

dated

into

"under

memorandum

judgment

Denyakin,

reply

placed

a

to

scientist

investigation

have

Exhibit

Tll-3396,

Department

portions

(2)

order.

which

of

statement

forensic

Kirill

to

consists

#

seal

of

Plaintiff's

Lab

to

Two

electronically

protective

summary

deposition of

filed

addition,

to

the

judgment.

along

reply memorandum.

parties

Defendant's

exhibits

23,

2011.

transcript

and

The Defendant

relating

to

Agent

deposition.

4.
court

the

decedent,

to
of

by

a

Keenan Hook.

FS

Virginia

with

Plaintiff's

exhibits

Analysis,

to

In

2011,

Agent

summary

exhibits,

judgment
17,

separate

not

seal.

the

opposition

prepared

by

Exhibit

May

Special

14

Exhibit

summary

Rankin's

were

of his

which

to

subject

under

two pages

as

Defendant

however,

filing

19

opposition

produced

seal

3.

submitted

were

for

to

seal"

in

exhibits,

Defendant's

sought

Plaintiff

Before

must

weigh

a

court
the

can

seal

competing

any

item

interests

from public
"in

accord

view,

the

with

the

procedures
(4th

855

mandated by

Cir.

1984)."

F.2d

first

178,

give

reasonable

individual
present

is

the
in

consider

to

seal

rejecting

notice
to

of

of

As

ongoing

able

to

430,442

Washington
has

no

ongoing

442.

Cf.

Court

being

to

general

has

it.

the

386

right

of
See

in

While

docket

Id.

The

it

court

and,

reasons

findings,

a

notify persons

sealing

the

must

and

235.

or

issue."

"state

if

for

it

its

and the reasons

order

567,

enforcement

without

to

the

Va.

574

§

to

provide

an

to

In

§

Cir.

must

details

of

the

manner

that

in

a

of

787
State

2004).

documents
2703 (D),

context

agencies

2703(D),

Dept.

(4th

access
Re:

the

public

In Re:

(quoting

F.3d

must

to

seal

at

request,

sealing

"law

crime

2011)

Id.

court

the

to

court

previously recognized in the

released

investigation.

In

request

Corp.,

Id.

investigation."

Va.

Post,

a

the

must

investigations,

(E.D.

Knight,

alternatives

documents,

alternatives

the

System

supported by specific

this

investigation

Medical

a

deciding

drastic

investigate

compromises

of

F.2d 231

MD.

challenge

adequate record for review."

5.

of

unwarranted,

743

Under

1988).

courtroom

less

Publishing Co.,

University,

Cir.

advance

decision to seal
for

(4th

public

notice

in

decides

v.

opportunity

"reasonably
must

Stone

181

the

In re Knight

787

F.

related
F.

the Matter of Application and Affidavit

Supp.2d

Police

The

be

v.

public
to

Supp.2d

an
at

for a Search

Warrant,

923

F.2d

324,

326

(4th

Cir.

1991)

(affirming

decision

to unseal affidavit only after investigation had concluded).

6.

Exhibits

opposition

to

4

summary

after

this

items

confidential.

the

items

into

the

Hook.

is

Court

still

shooting

In

in

a

of

the

to

shooting

Court,

death

the

because

investigation

conducted

this

in

only

making

procedure

criminal

Denyakin,
made

discovery

order

this

ongoing

memorandum

in

protective

Kirill

into

obtained

followed

the VSP's

Court

because

(Exhibit

4

scientific

(Exhibit

the

granted

discovery

addition,

about

of

death

the

and

evidence

issued

Court

Plaintiff's

were

the representations

statement

SJ)

the

of

by Agent
the VSP's

Mr.

Denyakin

ongoing.

documents

to

to

judgment

The

investigation

Although

recent

9

first

were part

Based on

criminal

and

9

Agent

to

nature of

items

the

Court
in

access

they

contained

Officer

Plaintiff's

Plaintiff's

and

remains

light

of

Memo,

these

Rankin's

Opposition

to

recovered

in

Opposition

to

reveals

his

additional

details

impressions

concerned
the

to

in

related

Memo,

deposition

investigation

The

Plaintiff

analysis/data

Hook's

investigator.

to

the

SJ) .

as

the

about

the

sensitive

of

the VSP's

ongoing nature

lead

investigation.

7.

provided

Notice

to

opportunity

of

the
for

the

public,

Plaintiff's

and

there

interested parties

to

motion

to

seal

has

been

a

reasonable

the

Plaintiff's

challenge

has

been

motion.

No

party

has

In

regards

appeared

or

objected

to

either

sealing

request.

8.
that

there

that

the

Kirill

are

no

to

reasonable

investigation

Denyakin

is

memoranda,

adequately

inform

and the basis
9.

For

Exhibits

4

with
reply
(ECF

9

Defendant's

Defendant's

the

the

and

as

addition,

the

nature

marked

may

remain

sealed

reasons,

summary

adequate

the

the

the

the
to

Court

memorandum

judgment

confidential

addition,
as

modestly
inform

and

and

sealed

opposition

Exhibit

remain

redacted
public

that

1

to

"under

of

DOUGLAS

UNITED

the

version
issues

r

6,

2 012

E.

MILLER

STATES

MAGISTRATE

the

Defendant's

public
of

to

seal"

United States Magistrate Judge

February

and

controversy

ORDERS

in

version

the

Douglas E.

Virginia

of

exhibits

presented.

Norfolk,

fact

action requested.

Plaintiff's

for

the

redacted

unsealed

of

finds

shooting

the

of

the

of

2011,

numerous

In

is

23,

the

Court.

53)

In

the Court

light

as

court

motion

reply be

April

in

well

this

No.

the

foregoing
to

sealing,

public

the

for

into

to

alternatives

continuing.

unredacted

the

alternatives

JUDGE