From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sanders v. Broomfield

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 28, 2022
1:92-cv-05471-JLT (E.D. Cal. Nov. 28, 2022)

Opinion

1:92-cv-05471-JLT

11-28-2022

RONALD L. SANDERS, Petitioner, v. RON BROOMFIELD, Warden of San Quentin State Prison, Respondent.


DEATH PENALTY CASE

FURTHER SCHEDULING OF TENTATIVE ORDER

On November 7, 2022, the Court issued a tentative order regarding respondent's notification filed on September 26, 2022, that information protected from disclosure pursuant to a 2007 Protective Order in this case had been released to representatives of the Kern County District Attorney's Office. (See Doc. 417.)

Petitioner timely responded to the tentative order, but he did so without the benefit of a list of protected and unprotected documents released to district attorney representatives that was subsequently provided by respondent. (See Docs. 418-420.) Petitioner requested that respondent be ordered to provide an inventory of each and every document released to the district attorney representatives, including Protected Information. (See Doc. 419.) Petitioner further requested that the Court “postpone its decision regarding sanctions or other remedial orders, including an order precluding the People of the State of California from proceeding with a retrial of the penalty phase[,]” pending his reasonable opportunity to review of such an inventory. (Id. at 4.)

Respondent timely replied to petitioner's response. (See Doc. 420.) Respondent stated that petitioner had been served with and possessed a list of the released documents, including Protected Information. (Id.) Respondent requested that petitioner be directed to file any amended response to the tentative order within a reasonable time. (Id.) Respondent further requested that thereafter, the Tentative Order finding that sanctions are not warranted, be finalized. (Id. citing Doc. 416; Lambright v. Ryan, 698 F.3d 808, 826 (9th Cir. 2012) (finding sufficient a sanction that returned parties to the status quo ante following inadvertent violation of discovery protective order).)

The Court, having reviewed the parties' filings, and the record, finds good cause to provide further scheduling of the tentative order.

Accordingly, within fifteen (15) days of the service date of this order, petitioner may file an amended response to the Court's November 7, 2022 tentative order. Within fifteen (15) days of the filing of petitioner's amended response, if any is filed, respondent's counsel may file a reply thereto. If petitioner fails timely to file an amended response, then the Court's tentative ruling shall become its final ruling on the matter. Any filing by the parties that discloses Protected Information shall be filed under seal.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve copies of this order upon counsel for petitioner, Nina Rivkind, and counsel for respondent, Supervising Deputy Attorney General Kenneth Sokoler and Assistant Attorney General Lewis Martinez.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Sanders v. Broomfield

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 28, 2022
1:92-cv-05471-JLT (E.D. Cal. Nov. 28, 2022)
Case details for

Sanders v. Broomfield

Case Details

Full title:RONALD L. SANDERS, Petitioner, v. RON BROOMFIELD, Warden of San Quentin…

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Nov 28, 2022

Citations

1:92-cv-05471-JLT (E.D. Cal. Nov. 28, 2022)