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.

Troas V. Barnett v. Martin Gamboa

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


January 17, 2013

TROAS V. BARNETT,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
MARTIN GAMBOA, ANGEL DURAN, AND MANUEL TORRES,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Barbara A. McAuliffe United States Magistrate Judge

OR DER R EGAR DING PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS TO COURT ORDER DENYING PROCEDURES FOR THE IMPANELMENT OF JURY AND TO THE PROVIDING OF STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS THE DAY OF TRIAL (ECF Nos. 256)

Plaintiff Troas V. Barnett is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding against Defendants Martin Gamboa, Angel Duran and Manuel Torres for the use of excessive force, and Defendant Torres for failure to intervene in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The matter is currently set for trial on January 22, 2012.

On December 17, 2012, Plaintiff filed a request for courtroom deputy to provide the procedures utilized by the court in the impanelment of the jury. (ECF Nos. 219, 220.) On December 19, 2012, Plaintiff filed a request for the court to provide assistance in obtaining standard jury instructions. (ECF No. 218.)

On December 26, 2012, the Court denied Plaintiff's motions. In so doing, the Court notified Plaintiff that (1) the Court would explain the procedures used to impanel the jury on the day of trial; and (2) the Court would provide jury instructions to Plaintiff on the morning of trial for his review. (ECF No. 223.)

On January 14, 2013, Plaintiff filed objections to the Court's order. (ECF No. 256.) Plaintiff contends that he is unfamiliar with the procedures used to impanel a jury and that he has filed Ninth Circuit Model Jury Instructions that should be used at trial.

Plaintiff's objections are DISREGARDED. At the motions in limine hearing held on January 15, 2013, the Court explained the process for impanelment of the jury. The Court will review this process again with the parties before the start of trial on January 22, 2013. As to proposed jury instructions, the Court has received proposed jury instructions from Plaintiff and from Defendants. These instructions will be considered by the Court prior to trial.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20130117

© 1992-2013 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.