Page v. Nev. Attorney Gen.

Full title: DANIEL PAGE, Petitioner, v. NEVADA ATTORNEY GENERAL, et al., Respondents.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Aug 3, 2017

Case No. 3:16-cv-00600-MMD-WGC (D. Nev. Aug. 3, 2017)

Opinion

Case No. 3:16-cv-00600-MMD-WGC

08-03-2017

DANIEL PAGE, Petitioner, v. NEVADA ATTORNEY GENERAL, et al., Respondents.

MIRANDA M. DU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ORDER

In this habeas corpus action, on August 2, 2017, the petitioner, Nevada prisoner Daniel Page, filed an amended habeas petition (ECF No 16), and several exhibits (ECF Nos. 17, 18, 19, 21).

Along with his amended petition, Page filed a filed a motion for leave to file certain exhibits under seal (ECF No. 20). In that motion, Page requests leave of court to file under seal copies of medical records (Exhibits 43, 44, 45, 46 and 47), a presentence investigation report (Exhibit 58), and a presentence investigation report questionnaire (Exhibit 59).

There is a strong presumption in favor of public access to judicial filings and documents. See Nixon v. Warner Communication, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978); see also Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006); Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1134 (9th Cir. 2003). However, the court has inherent power over its own records and files, and access may be denied where the court determines that the documents may be used for "improper purposes." Nixon, 435 U.S. at 598; Hagestad v. Tragesser, 49 F.3d 1430, 1433-34 (9th Cir. 1995); Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(d); LR IA 10-5.

Under Nevada law, a presentence investigation report, and the sources of information for such a report, are confidential, and are not to be made part of a public record. See NRS 176.156(5). Moreover, all the documents Page seeks to file under seal contain information regarding medical and other private matters. In light of the state law, and in light of Page's concerns regarding his privacy, the Court finds that there is good cause for these exhibits to be filed under seal.

It is therefore ordered that petitioner's Motion for Leave to File Exhibits Under Seal (ECF No. 20) is granted. Petitioner is granted leave of court to file his Exhibits Number 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 58 and 59 under seal. As those exhibits have already been filed under seal (ECF No. 21), no further action is necessary in this regard.

DATED THIS 3^rd day of August 2017.

/s/_________

MIRANDA M. DU

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE