Harris v. State of Washington

Filing 18

ORDER denying 12 Motion to Compel signed by Judge David W. Christel.**2 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(Ray Harris, Prisoner ID: 271486)(MET)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

8
9
10

RAY CHARLES HARRIS,

11

Petitioner,

13

STATE OF WASHINGTON,
Respondent.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
CONDUCT DISCOVERY

v.

12

CASE NO. 3:16-CV-05716-BHS-DWC

The District Court has referred this action filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 to United States
Magistrate Judge David W. Christel. Currently before the Court is Petitioner Ray Charles
Harris’s Motion to Compel Discovery (“Motion”). Dkt. 12. 1 As Petitioner must have leave of
Court to conduct discovery, the Court interprets the Motion as a request to conduct discovery.
Petitioner filed this habeas corpus Petition (“Petition”) challenging his convictions of assault
and malicious mischief. Dkt. 7. The Court directed service of the Petition on August 29, 2016. Dkt.
8. Petitioner filed the Motion on September 14, 2016, requesting the Court compel the Pierce

22
23
1

Also pending in this action are Petitioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Respondent’s Answer to

24 the Petition, which are ready for the Court’s consideration on October 28, 2016. See Dkt. 14, 15.
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO CONDUCT
DISCOVERY - 1

1 County Superior Court Clerk to “hand over trial transcripts, motion to dismiss and motion for arrest
2 of judgement (sic)” in his case. Dkt. 12. Respondent filed a Response to the Motion on September
3 15, 2016. Dkt. 13, 15. Petitioner has not filed a reply to the Response.
4

Under Rule 6 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, “[a] judge may, for good

5 cause, authorize a party to conduct discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and
6 may limit the extent of discovery.” Rule 6(a). “A party requesting discovery must provide
7 reasons for the request. The request must also include any proposed interrogatories and requests
8 for admission, and must specify any requested documents.” Rule 6(b).
9

Petitioner specified the documents he requests from the Pierce County Superior Court

10 Clerk. Dkt. 12. Petitioner, however, does not provide any reason for requesting the documents.
11 See id. Therefore, the Court will not grant leave to conduct discovery at this time. As Petitioner
12 does not have permission to conduct discovery, the Motion is denied.
13

Dated this 18th day of October, 2016.

15

A

16

David W. Christel
United States Magistrate Judge

14

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO CONDUCT
DISCOVERY - 2