Williams v. Hall, No. 6:2001cv00812 - Document 155 (D. Or. 2010)

Court Description: Opinion and Order: This order sets out the discovery plan as well as resolves any outstanding disputes between the parties (See Order). The court authorizes the expenditure of $1000. for the investigation. Any further expenses must be pre-authorized by the Court. Signed on February 9, 2010 by Chief Judge Ann L. Aiken. (cp)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON SHAWN WILLIAMS, Petitioner, GUY HALL, Respondent. Kristina Hellman Assistant Federal Public Defender 101 S.W. Main S t r e e t , Suite 1700 Portland, Oregon 97204 Attorney for petitioner John Kroger Attorney General Summer Gleason Senior Assistant Attorney General Kristen Boyd Assistant Attorney General Department of J u s t i c e 1162 Court Street NE Salem, Oregon 97301-4096 Attorneys for respondent Page 1 - OPINION AND ORDER Civil No. 01-812-AA OPINION AND ORDER AIKEN, Chief Judge: The parties submitted a proposed discovery plan for jury interviews in accordance with this Court's Order of August 18, 2009 (doc. 136). This Order sets out the discovery plan as well as resolves any outstanding disputes between the parties. (1) Timeline and Reporting to the Court The Court agrees that a 120-day timeline for completion of the process of locating and contacting the 38 jury panel members, with written status reports submitted to the Court every 30 days, is reasonable. (2) Proposed Search and Interview Methods (A) Initial Stage Investigation The parties agree that the Federal Public Defender (FPD) should conduct the investigation necessary to determine contact information for persons listed as potential juror witnesses. (B) Initial Contact and Questioning The initial juror contact and questioning may proceed as outlined by the FPD. A11 documents generated from this contact will be copied and provided to counsel for respondent. The parties agree on all proposed questions for the juror witnesses, except two. See Petitioner's Ex. 4, Specific Questions for Jury Panel Members. The court will assume that the parties have reached agreement on proposed question no. 9 as counsel informed the court that they were working towards a Page 2 - OPINION AND ORDER resolution on this question. Proposed question no. 13l will be allowed with the caveat that this Court will exclude any information obtained by this question that exceeds the scope of the issues in this case, or in any way violates the province of jury deliberations. Finally, proposed question no. 15 will also be allowed with the same caveat. (C) Depositions Upon identification of the juror witnesses, the FPD will then seek leave of the Court to conduct depositions. After receiving leave, the FPD will schedule depositions in conjunction with counsel for respondent. Counsel for respondent may be present for the depositions and may ask any questions they might have of the witness. Counsel for respondent may also contact and depose any of the juror witnesses not selected for deposition by the FPD. (3) Cost The Court authorizes the expenditure of $1,000 for the investigation. Any further expense must be pre-authorized by the Court. h he parties refer to this disputed question as "no. 12," however, petitioner's "Specific Questions for Jury Panel Members," attached as petitioner's Ex. 4, lists this question as Question No. 13. Page 3 - OPINION AND ORDER I T I S SO ORDERED. Dated this D day 1 of February 2 0 1 0 . Ann A i k e n U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t Judge P a g e 4 - O P I N I O N AND ORDER

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.