Opinion
3:15-cv-00493-RCJ-CSD
04-14-2022
RICHARD W. PETERS, Plaintiff, v. IRA BRANNON, Defendant.
ORDER
ROBERT C. JONES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff seeks the testimony of three witnesses at trial: Mr. William Lyons (Offender ID #79249), Mr. Richard Johnston (Offender ID #91380), and Mr. Fernando Rodriguez (Offender ID #51052). He moves to have Nevada Department of Corrections to produce these witnesses for testimony via video conference. (ECF Nos. 165, 166, 167.) Plaintiff also filed three proposed subpoenas compelling these witnesses' testimony. (ECF Nos. 168, 169, 170.) The Court notes that subpoenas compelling these persons to testify are ineffective as they are incarcerated; he rather needs writs for habeas corpus ad testificandum to compel the prison to allow them to appear. The Court thus liberally construes these motions as requesting writs for habeas corpus ad testificandum.
The form motion that Plaintiff used states that he seeks these witnesses' “personal appearance or, in the alternative, that [they] be made available to appear by telephone or video conference.” In all three motions, Plaintiff underlined “video conference.”
For such motions, “the trial judge should take into account the costs and inconvenience of transporting a prisoner from his place of incarceration to the courtroom, any potential danger or security risk which the presence of a particular inmate would pose to the court, the substantiality of the matter at issue, the need for an early determination of the matter, the possibility of delaying trial until the prisoner is released, the probability of success on the merits, the integrity of the correctional system, and the possibility that the testimony could be presented by deposition.” Habeas corpus ad testificandum, Federal Trial Handbook: Civil § 21:14 (2021-2022 Edition).
Applying these factors here, the Court finds that compelling Nevada Department of Corrections to produce these witnesses via video conference from their current place of incarceration is not unduly burdensome and should therefore be granted.
CONCLUSION
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Motion to have Inmate Witness Testify at Trial (ECF No. 165) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Motion to have Inmate Witness Testify at Trial (ECF No. 166) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Motion to have Inmate Witness Testify at Trial (ECF No. 167) is GRANTED.
The Court hereby issues writs for habeas corpus ad testificandum to Nevada Department of Corrections to have Mr. William Lyons (Offender ID #79249), Mr. Richard Johnston (Offender ID #91380), and Mr. Fernando Rodriguez (Offender ID #51052) testify via video conference for trial in this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.