Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_04-cv-01833/USCOURTS-casd-3_04-cv-01833-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

04cv1833

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALBERTO VERA JIMENEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

R. SAMBRANO, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No. 04cv1833-L(PCL)

ORDER ON MOTIONS IN LIMINE

AND EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS

The parties’ motions in limine came on for a hearing on August 22, 2008 at 11:00 a.m. 

Plaintiff appeared pro se. Terrence F. Sheehy, Esq. appeared on behalf of Defendants. 

For the reasons stated on the record, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. Defendants’ motion in limine to admit evidence if Plaintiff’s convictions for

burglary, robbery and unlawful taking of a vehicle is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiff’s

robbery conviction and DENIED in all other respects.

2. Defendants’ motion in limine to exclude any reference at trial to Plaintiff’s

acquittal of criminal charges for the underlying incident on which Plaintiff sues is GRANTED

with respect to related exhibits (Plaintiff’s Exhibit F) and is in all other respects DENIED

WITHOUT PREJUDICE to raising the same objection at trial. 

3. Defendants’ motion in limine to have Plaintiff shackled at trial is DENIED.

/ / / / /

Case 3:04-cv-01833-L-PCL Document 219 Filed 08/26/08 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2 04cv1833

4. Plaintiff’s motion in limine to appear before the jury unshackled and in civilian

clothes is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall make his own arrangements regarding civilian clothing.

5. Defendants’ motion in limine to authenticate the July 19, 2004 videotaped

interview of Plaintiff is DENIED AS MOOT.

6. Defendants’ motion in limine to exclude Plaintiff’s witnesses not listed on the

Joint Witness List is DENIED.

7. Defendants’ motion in limine to exclude Plaintiff’s exhibits not listed on the Joint

Exhibit List is DENIED.

8. Defendants’ motion in limine to exclude the testimony of attorney Scoville,

investigator Wallet, Dr. Flood, and inmates Valenzo, Leon, and Montoya is GRANTED IN

PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows:

a. as to attorney Scoville, inmate Leon and Dr. Flood, the motion is denied as

moot;

b. as to Dr. Weeks, the motion is denied without prejudice to raising the same

objection at trial (as reflected on the record, Defendants intended to refer to Dr. Weeks rather

than Dr. Flood); 

c. as to investigator Wallet, the motion is granted;

d. as to inmate Valenzo, the motion is denied to the extent Mr. Valenzo will

testify as a percipient witness to the incident and Plaintiff’s injuries, and denied without

prejudice to raising the same objection at trial to the extent Mr. Valenzo will testify about

witness intimidation; and

e. as to inmate Montoya, the motion is denied without prejudice to raising the

same objection at trial.

9. Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s witnesses are addressed in item 8 above.

10. Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s exhibits are SUSTAINED IN PART AND

OVERRULED IN PART as follows:

a. as to Plaintiff’s Exhibit B (Plaintiff’s medical records), the ruling is reserved;

/ / / / /

Case 3:04-cv-01833-L-PCL Document 219 Filed 08/26/08 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3 04cv1833

b. as to Plaintiff’s Exhibit D (investigator Wallet’s notes), Defendants’ objections

are sustained and the exhibit shall be excluded; and 

c. as to Plaintiff’s Exhibit F (documents relating to Plaintiff’s acquittal), the

objections are sustained and the exhibit shall be excluded. 

11. Plaintiff’s motion in limine to exclude Defendants’ witnesses and exhibits is

GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows:

a. as to Exhibit 1 (photographs of cell 203), the motion is denied, provided that

Defendants properly authenticate the exhibit and use it solely as a demonstrative exhibit;

b. as to Exhibits 7, 8 and 9 (abstracts of judgment), the motion is denied with

respect to the abstract of judgment for the robbery conviction and granted in all other respects;

c. as to Exhibits 10 and 11 (rules violation reports regarding “pruno”) and Officer

S. Schnell, the motion is denied to the extent the evidence is used in rebuttal if Plaintiff denies

knowing what “pruno” is, and granted in all other respects;

d. as to the photographs of Defendants’ injuries, the motion is denied without

prejudice to raising the same objection at trial;

e. as to calling Plaintiff as an adverse witness, the motion is denied;

f. as to Robert Borg (Defendants’ use of force expert), the motion is denied;

g. as to James L. Norris (Defendants’ forensic expert), the motion is denied as

moot;

h. as to Dr. K. Grewal, the motion is granted to the extent Dr. Grewal intends to

testify regarding causation and denied in all other respects;

I. as to Sergeant A. Verkouterent, the motion is denied as moot.

12. As reflected by the parties’ stipulations on the record, they shall not call witnesses

12 through 18 listed on the Joint Witness List to authenticate the records.

13. As reflected by the parties’ stipulations on the record, they do not object to the

authenticity of the exhibits listed on the Joint Exhibit List.

14. As reflected by Defendants’ stipulation on the record, they shall not call James L.

Norris to authenticate the videotape of Plaintiff’s July 19, 2004 interview.

Case 3:04-cv-01833-L-PCL Document 219 Filed 08/26/08 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4 04cv1833

15. Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s proposed statement of facts to the jury as his

direct testimony are SUSTAINED to the extent that Plaintiff may not reference facts as to which

he knows there will not be supporting testimony and OVERRULED in all other respects.

16. Defendants may depose Dr. Weeks before trial.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 26, 2008

M. James Lorenz

United States District Court Judge

COPY TO: 

HON. PETER C. LEWIS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ALL PARTIES/COUNSEL

Case 3:04-cv-01833-L-PCL Document 219 Filed 08/26/08 Page 4 of 4