(HC) Velasquez v. Sherman ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICARDO VELASQUEZ, Case No.: 1:15-cv-01288-AWI-JLT (HC) 12 Petitioner, ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR DISCOVERY 13 v. (Doc. 67) 14 STU SHERMAN, 15 Respondent. 16 17 The petitioner moves the Court for an order granting discovery so he can serve a subpoena 18 duces tecum on the Tulare Police Department to obtain: 19 1. 18 fingerprint cards taken from the interior and exterior of a Jeep Grand Cherokee on or about October 5, 2009, for inspection and examination by defense 20 counsel and a defense-retained expert; 21 2. The evidence log entry documenting receipt of the 18 fingerprint cards taken from the interior and exterior of a Jeep Grand Cherokee on or about October 22 5, 2009; 23 3. The evidence log entry documenting chain of custody of the 18 fingerprint cards taken from the interior and exterior of a Jeep Grand Cherokee on or about 24 October 5, 2009; and 25 4. The chain of custody for the 18 fingerprint cards taken from the interior and exterior of a Jeep Grand Cherokee on or about October 5, 2009. 26 27 (Doc. 67 at 3) The petitioner argues that good cause exists for the discovery. Id. at 3-4. 28 Respondent does not dispute that good cause exists for this discovery (Doc. 73) based upon tge 1 order of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (Doc. 53), and the Court agrees (Bracy v. Gramley, 2 520 U.S. 899, 904 (1997)). Consequently, the Court ORDERS: 3 1. The petitioner’s motion to conduct discovery to issue a subpoena to the Tulare 4 Police Department to obtain the items listed above is GRANTED1. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated: November 29, 2021 _ /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Of course, if the Tulare Police Department files an objection to the production (though the Court does not expect this to occur), the petitioner may file a motion to compel it, if appropriate.