Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

James v. Beer

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


December 17, 2008

JOHN E. JAMES III, PLAINTIFF,
v.
OIG BEER, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER RE CLARIFICATION OF SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM SERVED UPON (Doc. 247)

I. Background

Plaintiff John E. James III ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action. This action is proceeding on plaintiff's amended complaint, filed January 4, 2005 against the following defendants: Sgt. Beer, Sgt. J. Martinez, Sgt. R. Vogel, Correctional Officer Torres, Correctional Officer H. German, Correctional Officer D. Valtierra, Correctional Officer E. Trotter, MTA F. Lemos, MTA. G. Maldonaldo, R.N. N. Edmond, Dr. J., R. Broomfield, Captain. D. Means, Lt. Rabe, S. Rocha, D. Stockman, and V. Yamamoto. Plaintiff names all defendants in both their individual and official capacities (Doc. 24, Amended Complaint).

On June 7, 2007, Plaintiff filed a motion for the issuance of a subpoena duces tecum, which was denied without prejudice. A renewed motion was to be accompanied by an offer of proof concerning the existence of the documents and the location of the documents. (Doc. 199, Motion for Subpoena Duces Tecum; Doc. 222, Order on Motion for Subpoena Duces Tecum). On March 31, 2008, Plaintiff filed a renewed motion, seeking the issuance of a subpoena duces tecum to be served upon the California Office of the Inspector General and also the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Office of Internal Affairs. (Doc. 223).

By order issued August 11, 2008, the Court granted Plaintiff's motion in part. (Doc. 243). On August 19, 2008, the Court issued orders directing service of the subpoena duces tecum upon the Office of the Inspector General, and also upon the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Office of Internal Affairs. (Docs. 245, 246). On August 22, 2008, Plaintiff filed a supplemental motion, seeking clarification of the documents ordered produced by the Office of the Inspector General. (Doc. 247).

II. Plaintiff's Supplemental Motion

On August 19, 2008, this Court issued a subpoena duces tecum upon the Office of the Inspector General ("OIG") commanding the production of "any and all statements, including but not limited to written or videotape statements, taken during the course of your investigations into plaintiff's allegation of use of excessive force against him on July 16, 2003." (Doc. 245).

In his supplemental motion, Plaintiff states that the subpoena duces tecum served upon the OIG is incomplete. Plaintiff states that a videotaped interview was conducted on behalf of the OIG wherein Plaintiff reported the alleged incident of excessive force currently being litigated in this action. However, the interview was taken during the course of an investigation into an unrelated incident involving Plaintiff, bearing OIG Case No. JC: BH:03-2062 PI. Plaintiff requests that the documents ordered produced by the OIG include all documents (written or video recorded statements) obtained in the above-captioned OIG case.

Out of an abundance of caution, the Court shall issue a second subpoena duces tecum upon the Office of the Inspector General, commanding the production of the videotaped interview of John E. James III, Inmate No. P-13474, taken in July 2003, in the Office of Inspector General Case No. JC: BH:03-2062 PI.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20081217

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.