Opinion
CV-18-02458-PHX-DJH
06-07-2021
Jack Conroy, Plaintiff, v. Charles L Ryan, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Diane J. Humetewa United States District Judge
Before the Court is Plaintiff's “Motion to Compel Return of Plaintiff's Legal Documents and Property” (Doc. 363), filed on May 13, 2021. The Court ordered Defendants to file an expedited Response by May 19, 2021 (Doc. 364), which the Defendants did (Doc. 365). Plaintiff has not filed a reply.
In his Motion to Compel, Plaintiff also states that his life is in danger as a result of false rumors that he was “snitching” on inmates during a trial prep conference with Defendants' counsel. (Doc. 363 at 1-2). Plaintiff made no request for relief related to those allegations in his Motion to Compel. On May 21, 2021, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Emergency Order of Protection (Doc. 13) in Conroy v. Centurion, 2:21-cv-0685-DJH-DMF, that raised the same allegations and sought specific relief as to those concerns. That Motion is pending. This Order only addresses Plaintiff's request for return of his legal documents.
In his Motion, Plaintiff claims that while engaged in a video conference with Defendants' counsel on April 27, 2021, his case-related legal documents were “taken, destroyed, and never returned.” (Doc. 363 at 2). He seeks an order compelling the “ADC defendants to return plaintiff's legal documents and property.” (Id. at 1). Defendants respond that due to safety concerns, Plaintiff was moved to a one-room detention cell on April 27, 2021, and on April 30, 2021, “received his property allowed at his housing location.” (Doc. 365 at 2). Counsel attached a copy of Plaintiff s April 27, 2021, Property Inventory form, which was signed by Plaintiff on April 30, 2021. (Doc. 365-1). Defendants represent that
Any property not permitted at that location has been placed in his long-term property storage at the unit's Property Department. Plaintiff arrived with seven legal boxes and has received the allotted limit of legal boxes he may possess in his cell. Plaintiff may request a one-for-one legal-box exchange for any legal box stored in the unit's Property Department by submitting a written request through Property. There is no evidence that any of Plaintiff s property was destroyed at either the sending unit or the receiving unit.(Doc. 365 at 2).
Plaintiff has not replied to these representations. Finding that Defendants have sufficiently assured the Court that Plaintiffs case-related legal documents are secure and accessible to Plaintiff, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs “Motion to Compel Return of Plaintiff s Legal Documents and Property” (Doc. 363) is DENIED.