From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Cruz-Ramirez

United States District Court, N.D. California
Mar 3, 2011
No. CR 08-0730 WHA (N.D. Cal. Mar. 3, 2011)

Opinion

No. CR 08-0730 WHA.

March 3, 2011


ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT CRUZ-RAMIREZ'S APPLICATION FOR ISSUANCE OF RULE 17 HENTHORN SUBPOENA TO ACSO


Defendant Jonathan Cruz-Ramirez seeks a subpoena for Henthorn materials from the ACSO relating to the following ACSO officers and employees: (1) J. Stoneberger; (2) J. Pinedo; (3) D. Blanchard; (4) J. Dormer; (5) M. Hartman; (6) Masood Feroz; (7) Mario Vigo; and (8) Kevin Estep (Dkt. No. 3597). This request is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.

For good cause shown, it is hereby ORDERED that a subpoena duces tecum shall be issued to the custodian of records for the ACSO for production of the documents listed in Attachment A to the subpoenas with respect to the following officers/employees: (1) J. Stoneberger; (2) J. Pinedo; (3) M. Hartman; (4) Masood Feroz; and (5) Mario Vigo.

The request regarding the records of D. Blanchard, J. Dormer, and K. Estep, however, is DENIED. The ACSO need not produce records regarding these officers/employees. Neither D. Blanchard nor K. Estep are included in the government's final witness list. Although J. Dormer is on the government's witness list, records regarding J. Dormer have already been produced by the ACSO in response to a Henthorn subpoena from defendant Angel Noel Guevara and the in camera review of those records was completed in January. A January 26 order informed counsel for defendant Guevara that no Henthorn material needing to be turned over was located in the Dormer files produced by the ACSO.

The ACSO shall produce any responsive documents to the Court within 14 DAYS of service. Given the fast approaching trial date, if there are any objections by the ACSO to the subpoenas, these objections should be raised prior to the deadline for compliance. Counsel are encouraged to work with one another to reach compromises where possible and avoid unnecessary litigation.

After the documents are produced by the ACSO, the procedure will be as follows. Prior to disclosure to counsel for defendant Cruz-Ramirez, the undersigned will review in camera the materials produced. Any responsive Henthorn materials will be turned over to counsel for defendant Cruz-Ramirez as soon as practicable. The undersigned will endeavor for the review to be complete by the commencement of trial, although this is not guaranteed.

The records will not be disclosed until a protective order regarding their use is in place. Counsel for defendant Cruz-Ramirez and the ACSO shall submit a proposed stipulated protective order for use of the Henthorn material as soon as practicable.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 3, 2011.

SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR OBJECTS IN A CRIMINAL CASE

TO:

Custodian of Records

Alameda County Sheriffs office 1401

Lakeside Drive, 12th Floor

Oakland, CA 94612

YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce at the place, date, and time specified the document(s) or object(s) indicated below. If compliance would be unreasonable or oppressive, you may file a motion requesting the court to quash or modify the subpoena, to review the documents in camera, or to permit production only pursuant to a protective order.

PLACE COURTROOM/JUDGE [] United States Courthouse [] United States Courthouse [] United States Courthouse William Alsup 450 Golden Gate Avenue 280 South First Street 1301 Clay Street San Francisco, CA 94102 San Jose, CA 95113 Oakland, CA 94612 DATE AND TIME If the document(s) or object(s) are produced in advance of the date specified, either to the court in an envelope delivered to the clerk's office or to the issuing attorney whose name and address appears 14 days of service below, no appearance is necessary. The following document(s) or object(s) shall be produced:

Personnel and complaint records for the following ACSO deputies, as more fully set forth in Attachment A: 1) J. Stoneberger #1952; 2) J. Pinedo #1762; 3) D. Blanchard #1419, 4) J. Donnet #1932, 5) M. Hartman #1938; 6) Masood Feroz #1934; 7) Mario Vigo; 0) Korin Estop #1718.

See Attachment A for description of documents.

NOTE: Parties requesting a subpoena requiring the appearance of a witness to testify at a criminal proceeding or to testify and bring documents to a criminal proceeding, must use Form CAND 89A, Subpoena to Testify in a Criminal Case. Forms are available at the Court's Internet site: http://www.cand.uscourts.gov.

U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE OR CLERK OF COURT DATE RICHARD WEIKING March 3, 2011 (By) Deputy Clerk Dawn Toland ATTORNEY'S NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER:

Susan Raffanti, 483 Ninth St. #200, Oakland, CA 94607. 510/451-2825

PROOF OF SERVICE DATE PLACE RECEIVED BY SERVER DATE PLACE SERVED SERVED ON (PRINT NAME) FEES AND MILEAGE TENDERED TO WITNESS [] YES [] NO AMOUNT S __________ SERVED BY (PRINT NAME) TITLE DECLARATION OF SERVER I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing information contained in the Proof of Service is true and correct. Executed on ____________________ ___________________________________ DATE SIGNATURE OF SERVER ___________________________________ ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ___________________________________ ADDRESS OF SERVER

ATTACHMENT A TO SUBPOENA PERSONNEL AND COMPLAINT RECORDS

Copies of any and all parts of the personnel records of the Alameda County Sheriffs Office deputies named below reflecting any complaints by citizens or other law enforcement officers, reprimands and/or disciplinary action related to honesty, integrity, racial bias, excessive force or conduct unbecoming an officer:

1) J. Stoneberger #1952;

2) J. Pinedo #1762;

3) D. Dlunolard #1419, 4) J. Donmer #1932,

5) M. Hartman #1938;

6) Masood Feroz #1934;

7) Mario Vigo;

8) Kevin Estep #1718.

The requested items include documents containing:

1. Any allegations that the officer fabricated facts, evidence, events or descriptions in any written incident report, oral report, citation, written submission to the police department or testimony in any court or administrative proceeding.

2. Any allegations that the officer acted with racial animus, used racially derogatory or insensitive terms in the officer's contact with the public or with co-workers, has made racial slurs or jokes or has targeted suspects or inmates because of their race, national origin or ethnic background.

3. Any allegations that the officer engaged in the use of excessive force in the execution of his duties as a Sheriffs deputy.

4. Any allegations that the officer engaged in the unlawful use of controlled substances, consumed alcohol while on duty, suffered from a mental or psychiatric condition apparent during the performance of his or her duties or displayed inappropriate anger or emotion while in the course of duty.

5. Any allegations that the officer engaged in acts of dishonesty or moral turpitude.

This subpoena compels the disclosure of all of the materials described above, including information that is more than five (5) years old, if that material or information is in the custody, possession or control of the recipient of this subpoena. This subpoena compels the disclosure of:

A. Initial complaints and any subsequent revisions to those complaints.

B. Complaint work summaries and/or chronologies of the investigator's work on any such complaint.

C. All "sustained complaint" memoranda detailing the nature of the complaint and describing the investigation which supports the recommended sustained finding.

D. All taped statements taken during the investigation of the complaint.

E. All incident reports gathered during the investigation of the complaint.

F. All Computer Assisted Dispatch (CAD) tapes and reports gathered during the investigation of the complaint.

G. All photographs taken during the investigation of the complaint.

H. All transcripts or recordings of complaint proceedings before any review board or supervisory officer.

I. All documents reflecting the findings of any review board or supervisory officer entered after investigation of the complaint.

J. Any record of discipline imposed on the named officers as a result of the findings of any review board or supervisory officer entered after the investigation of the complaint.

This subpoena is not limited to "sustained complaints" only but also compels the disclosure of unsustained complaints and the materials and information related to those complaints.


Summaries of

United States v. Cruz-Ramirez

United States District Court, N.D. California
Mar 3, 2011
No. CR 08-0730 WHA (N.D. Cal. Mar. 3, 2011)
Case details for

United States v. Cruz-Ramirez

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JONATHAN CRUZ-RAMIREZ, et al…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. California

Date published: Mar 3, 2011

Citations

No. CR 08-0730 WHA (N.D. Cal. Mar. 3, 2011)

Citing Cases

United States v. Racion

See United States v. Neal, Crim. No. 3:09CR17, 2009 WL 3112137, at *1 (W.D. N.C. Sept. 23, 2009) (declining…