CARTER, JOHNSON v. MARATHON COUNTY

Filing 12

ORDER denying 11 Motion to Seal Case. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 8/10/2010. (jef),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FO R THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN --------------------------------------------JOHNSON CARTER, P la i n t i f f , v. M AR AT H O N COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S O FFIC E and ASST. D.A. ROSA DELGADO, in official capacity and personal capacity, D efendan ts. --------------------------------------------In an order dated August 3, 2007, I denied plaintiff Johnson Carter's request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed his case with prejudice for his failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. In his complaint, plaintiff alleged that he worked as an informant participating in "control drug buys" as a way to "work off" criminal charges against him, but defendant Rosa Delgado, an assistant district attorney, prosecuted charges against him anyway. Now plaintiff has submitted a motion asking for the court to "do what yo u have to do to remove this case from the prison law library computer" because he would be "in big trouble" if other inmates learned that he worked for the authorities. It is unfortunate that plaintiff believes that he could be in danger at the Jackson ORDER 0 7 - cv -3 6 5 - b b c

1

C o rrectio n a l Institution; incarceration is unpleasant enough without the added burden of living in fear. However, the general rule is that materials should not be sealed "unless a statute or privilege justifies nondisclosure." United States v. Foster, 564 F.3d 852, 853 (7th C ir . 2009). This rule applies with special force to judicial opinions, which are presumptively public. Id. Further complicating things is that plaintiff failed to ask for the record to be s e aled until now, years after the orders were released to the public. Although the court's ord ers in this case were not published, they are accessible through electronic legal databases. It is unclear whether the electronic content providers would even honor this court's request to withdraw those orders from the database; I am unaware of any instances in which op inio ns have been removed from these databases other than opinions that have been vacated by a court. G iven that plaintiff does not indicate that he has encountered any threats to his safety sin ce the orders were issued, it is difficult to justify taking the extraordinary steps of sealing the case years after it was resolved and requesting that electronic content providers remove the orders from their databases. Therefore, I will deny the request unless plaintiff makes a m ore compelling showing why the court should take these actions. He will have to provide m o r e than mere speculation that he could be in "big trouble" if another inmate saw the ord ers in this case.

2

OR DER IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff Johnson Carter's request to seal the record in his case is DENIED. E n tered this 10 t h day of August, 2010. B Y THE COURT: /s/ B AR B AR A B. CRABB D istrict Judge

3