From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hood v. Russell

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION
Jul 16, 2013
No. 4:11CV321 RWS/LMB (E.D. Mo. Jul. 16, 2013)

Opinion

No. 4:11CV321 RWS/LMB

07-16-2013

MICHAEL HOOD, Petitioner, v. TERRY RUSSELL, Respondent.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on its own motion. Rule 7 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases states that "the judge may direct the parties to expand the record by submitting additional materials relating to the petition. The judge may require that these materials be authenticated." During trial, a tape of a 911 call made by the victim was played to the jury. The tape was State's Exhibit 6. Resp't Ex. B at 214. The contents of the tape recording are not currently in the record. The Court has determined that a review of the contents of the 911 call is necessary for an adequate resolution of this action. As a result, the Court will require respondent to submit an authenticated copy of either the tape itself or a transcript thereof.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order, respondent shall submit either (1) an authenticated copy of the 911 tape recording or (2) an authenticated transcript of the tape recording.

_________________

LEWIS M. BLANTON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Hood v. Russell

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION
Jul 16, 2013
No. 4:11CV321 RWS/LMB (E.D. Mo. Jul. 16, 2013)
Case details for

Hood v. Russell

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL HOOD, Petitioner, v. TERRY RUSSELL, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

Date published: Jul 16, 2013

Citations

No. 4:11CV321 RWS/LMB (E.D. Mo. Jul. 16, 2013)