Devlin v. Oliver ( 2023 )

1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 5 PIERRE DEVLIN, Case No. 2:21-cv-01266-ART-DJA 6 Petitioner, ORDER 7 v. 8 GABRIELA NAJERA, et al., 9 Respondents. 10 11 In this habeas corpus action, on May 8, 2023, Respondents filed a motion 12 to dismiss (ECF No. 30) along with several exhibits (ECF Nos. 31, 32, 33). 13 Respondents also filed a motion for leave to file an exhibit under seal (ECF No. 14 34) and the exhibit in question, their Exhibit 46, which is a presentence 15 investigation report (ECF No. 35). Petitioner Pierre Devlin, who is represented by 16 appointed counsel, did not respond to Respondents’ motion to file Exhibit 46 17 under seal. 18 While there is a strong presumption in favor of public access to judicial 19 filings and while courts prefer that the public retain access them, see Nixon v. 20 Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978), a court may seal its 21 records if a party demonstrates “compelling reasons” to do so. See Kamakana v. 22 City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178–79 (9th Cir. 2006). “Compelling 23 reasons” exist where the records could be used for improper purposes. 24 Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179 (citing Nixon, 435 U.S. at 598). Under Nevada law, 25 presentence investigation reports are confidential, and are not to be made part of 26 a public record. See NRS 176.156(5). The presentence investigation report filed 27 by Respondents in this case contains sensitive confidential information that 28 could be used for improper purposes. In view of the state law and considering the 1 2 || nature of the information in the presentence investigation report, the Court finds 3 || that there is good cause for the exhibit in question to be filed under seal. 4 It is therefore ordered that Respondents’ Motion for Leave to File Exhibit in 5 || Camera and Under Seal (ECF No. 34) is granted. Respondents are granted leave 6 || of court to file their Exhibit 46 under seal. As that exhibit has already been filed 7 || under seal (ECF No. 35), no further action is necessary in this regard. 8 It is further ordered that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d), 9 || Gabriela Najera is substituted for W. Hutchings as the respondent warden. The 10 || Clerk of the Court is directed to update the docket to reflect this change. 11 DATED THIS 24th day of May, 2023. 12 13 Ans losed Jer 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28