Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-01148/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-01148-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Isaac J. Mullins, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Dora B. Schriro, et al. 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-06-1148-PHX-NVW (LOA)

ORDER

This matter arises on Petitioner’s Motion for an Order authorizing travel expenses

to Utah. (docket # 66)

Counsel for Petitioner, Joy Bertrand, explains that, in preparation for the

upcoming evidentiary hearing, she plans to interview Petitioner’s father, Clayton Mullins. 

Clayton Mullins is currently serving a sentence at the Utah State Prison in Draper, Utah. 

Counsel requests $658.50 in travel expenses. (docket # 66 at 3)

On July 31, 2008, the Court authorized expenses for investigator Mary Kelly to

travel to Draper, Utah to interview Clayton Mullins. (docket # 64) Petitioner’s motion for

travel expenses for counsel to interview of Clayton Mullins in Utah did not explain why the

Court should authorize additional funds for an interview that Petitioner’s counsel had

already advised the Court would be conducted by investigator Kelly. Accordingly, the Court

ordered Petitioner to show cause why the motion for authorization for fees and expenses for

counsel, Joy Bertrand, to travel to Utah should not be denied as duplicative in view of the

Court’s July 31, 2008 Order.

Case 2:06-cv-01148-NVW-LOA Document 74 Filed 08/15/08 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 -

Petitioner timely responded to the order to show cause. (docket # 71)

Petitioner’s counsel explains that investigator Mary Kelly is not traveling to Utah to

interview Clayton Mullins. Rather, counsel plans to interview Mr. Mullins with the

assistance of a Salt Lake City investigator, Kelly Madsen. Counsel contends that she “does

not believe it is appropriate for her to conduct the interview alone, making [herself] the sole

witness to the interview, thus possibly creating an ethical issue as a material witness to a

matter in which she represents a party that would require her to recuse herself from the

representation of the Petitioner.” (docket # 71 at 2) 

The Court does not share counsel’s concern. The matter before the court is a

civil proceeding brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Joy Bertrand has been appointed to

represent Petitioner for purposes of an evidentiary hearing on the issue of whether “Mr.

[Kenneth] Huls provided ineffective assistance by failing to inform [Petitioner] of the

potential sentence he faced at trial if he rejected the plea offer.” (docket # 36 at 6-7)

Pursuant to Rule 6 of the Rules Governing Habeas Corpus cases, the court “may, for good

cause, authorize a party to conduct discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and

may limit the extent of discovery.” The Court construes Petitioner’s request to authorize

travel expenses to Utah to interview Petitioner’s father as a request to conduct discovery

pursuant to Rule 6. Petitioner explains that, in support of his Petition for Writ of Habeas

Corpus, he submitted an affidavit of his father, Clayton Mullins, regarding communications

from Petitioner’s trial counsel, Kenneth Huls, about the State’s plea offer in the underlying

criminal case. (docket # 57) Petitioner contends that Mr. Huls’ June 19, 2008 deposition

contradicts the statements in Clayton Mullins’ affidavit. Accordingly, Petitioner’s current

counsel “believes it is necessary to interview Clayton Mullins.” (docket # 57 at 2) 

The Court will permit discovery under Rule 6 of the Rules Governing § 2254

cases. Rule 6 specifically provides that such discovery shall be conducted in accordance

with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Thus, any additional information Petitioner seeks

to obtain from Clayton Mullins must be obtained in accordance with the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure applicable to discovery. Petitioner’s counsel may conduct this civil

Case 2:06-cv-01148-NVW-LOA Document 74 Filed 08/15/08 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 -

discovery herself without the assistance of an investigator. This is a civil matter and the

concerns that are relevant in a criminal matter, such as becoming a material witness, are not

relevant in this context. The Court, therefore, will vacate its July 31, 2008 Order (docket #

64) which had appointed an investigator and will deny Petitioner’s current request for

expenses to hire an investigator in Utah. The Court, however, will authorizes expenses for

counsel to travel to Utah.

Further, Respondents are entitled to participate in discovery in this civil matter. 

Although the Court, in an abundance of caution, sealed prior motions and orders (docket ##

56-71) related to the interview of Petitioner’s father, the Court will unseal them. Petitioner’s

father has already submitted an affidavit in support of the Petition for Writ of Habeas

Corpus which is a public record. The Ninth Circuit has made clear that a party seeking to

seal a judicial record bears the burden of overcoming the strong presumption of openness by

meeting the “compelling reasons” standard before a document may be properly sealed. 

Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006). “[T]he

strong presumption of access to judicial records applies fully to dispositive pleadings,

including motions for summary judgment and related attachments.” Id.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Court’s July 31, 2008 Order Appointing

Investigator (docket # 64) is VACATED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Application for Authorization of

Fees and Expenses for Investigator (docket # 66) is GRANTED to the extent the Court

authorizes travel expenses for counsel, Joy Bertrand, to travel to Utah to interview Clayton

Mullins in an amount not to exceed $658.50. The motion (docket # 66) is DENIED in all

other respects.

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:06-cv-01148-NVW-LOA Document 74 Filed 08/15/08 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 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall unseal docket

numbers 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 and 71 and shall provide

copies of those orders and motions to counsel for Respondents. 

DATED this 14th day of August, 2008.

Case 2:06-cv-01148-NVW-LOA Document 74 Filed 08/15/08 Page 4 of 4