Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01467/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01467-20/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TERRY HILLBLOM, SANDRA

HILLBLOM, and MICHAEL L.,

a minor, by and through his

guardians ad litem, TERRY

and SANDRA HILLBLOM,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

COUNTY OF FRESNO; former

FRESNO COUNTY SHERIFF RICHARD

PIERCE; FRESNO COUNTY DEPUTY

SHERIFF ROBERT CAREY; FRESNO

COUNTY SHERIFF’S SERGEANTS

KATHY CARREIRO and E.

BROUGHTON, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:07-cv-01467-LJO-SMS

ORDER FOLLOWING IN

CAMERA REVIEW OF CD

RE: IA INVESTIGATION

OF PERSONAL DOMESTIC

MATTER RE: DEFENDANT

DEPUTY ROBERT CAREY

In summary, while conducting an in camera review of

personnel files and internal investigations regarding the

Defendants named in this law suit, it became apparent that there

was no paper copy of an investigation regarding a personal

domestic matter involving Defendant Deputy Robert Carey. 

Plaintiff’s counsel Patience Milrod and/or Sara Hedgpeth-Harris

related their knowledge of the incident during the meet-and1

Case 1:07-cv-01467-LJO -SMS Document 83 Filed 06/21/10 Page 1 of 3
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

confer held in this Judge’s chambers on January 27, 2010. 

Directing Defendants’ counsel, Michael R. Linden, to make further

inquiry of the Sheriff’s Department, a brief email from Attorney

Linden to Judicial Assistant Frances Robles explained that

“...the paper (hard) copy of the file no longer exists, but

documents are saved on CD.” On February 1, 2010 the CD was

delivered to chambers.

The delay in reviewing the CD was due, in part, to the

difficulty the Court had in finding a computer program to

accommodate the reading of the contents of the CD. That review

has now been completed, the undersigned having read each and

every document contained on the CD regarding this domestic

dispute. The portions of the investigation deemed discoverable

have been copied from the CD and will be mailed directly to all

counsel. The contents of the CD determined not to be

discoverable are the detailed and somewhat lengthy interviews of

the minor victim, his minor siblings, wife of Detective Carey and

the victim’s mother, and Deputy Carey’s testimony of the

incident. The now over eight year old details of the domestic

incident in which the 16-year old sustained a cut lip arguably

are not determined to be relevant for the purpose of establishing

a Monell claim. See Monell v. Dept. of Soc. Serv., 436 U.S. 658,

691 (1978). That the internal investigation resulted in a

finding that the allegation of a violation of the law was

sustained (California Penal Code § 273d (a)) as well as a

violation of policy and procedure section 600.I.VV - General

Behavior is sufficient. 

//

2

Case 1:07-cv-01467-LJO -SMS Document 83 Filed 06/21/10 Page 2 of 3
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

The production of the documents as herein set forth are

ORDERED protected pursuant to the letter and spirit of the Fifth

Stipulated Protective Order (Doc. 82). 

Counsel for Defendants are DIRECTED to arrange with Judicial

assistant Frances Robles (499-5690) to retrieve the CD from the

undersigned’s chambers as soon as possible or certainly within

ten (10) days for the date of service of this order. 

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 21, 2010 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3

Case 1:07-cv-01467-LJO -SMS Document 83 Filed 06/21/10 Page 3 of 3