Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-02266/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-02266-18/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 

1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ALLEN HAMMLER, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

HAAS, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:15-cv-2266 JAM AC P 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights case against defendant 

correctional officers Louie and Haas on claims they failed to protect plaintiff from assault by 

other inmates on March 16, 2015, at High Desert State Prison. Trial commences in this case on 

April 20, 2020, before the Honorable John A. Mendez. The Pretrial Order issued on June 4, 

2019. ECF No. 85. 

 Presently pending are two motions filed by plaintiff on February 18, 2020: (1) a motion 

for issuance of writs of habeas corpus ad testificandum to provide for the trial attendance of his 

incarcerated witnesses, ECF No. 87; and (2) a motion to modify the Pretrial Order to name one 

additional witness, ECF No. 88. 

 Defendant Louie has filed an opposition to plaintiff’s first motion. ECF No. 89. Due to 

the approaching trial date, any further opposition to either of plaintiff’s motions shall be filed and 

//// 

Case 2:15-cv-02266-DAD-AC Document 90 Filed 02/25/20 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 

2 

served on or before Friday, March 6, 2020 (rather than the deadline set forth by Local Rule 

230(l)). 

 Meanwhile, plaintiff will be required to prepare, file and serve a response that addresses, 

for each of his proposed witnesses, the concerns raised by defendant Louie. Plaintiff’s reply to 

Louie’s opposition must be submitted to prison officials for mailing no later than Friday, March 

13, 2020. Plaintiff shall not respond to any other matters filed by defendants unless ordered by 

the court. 

 Plaintiff is informed that this court can issue writs of habeas corpus ad testificandum only 

for presently incarcerated individuals who are identifiable by inmate number and whose place of 

incarceration is known. Review of CDCR’s Inmate Locator1 demonstrates that two of plaintiff’s 

identified witnesses, Anthony Mitchell and [First Name Unknown] Reid, are not listed under the 

inmate numbers provided by plaintiff. The Inmate Locator includes several individuals with the 

same names, but none have inmate numbers close to those provided. Plaintiff did not provide an 

inmate number for a third witness, Cory Mitchell, and his name does not appear in the Inmate 

Locator. Further, CDCR’s Inmate Locator presently lists two of plaintiff’s witnesses, Abraham 

Deashawn Adams and Dannell Lee Richard, as Out to Hospital. 

 As a result, at present, only six of plaintiff’s witnesses are presently available to testify at 

trial: Kenneth Patterson CDCR # AB6602 (CSP-SAC), Robert Santoro CDCR # T40346 

(KVSP), Larry Alford CDCR # AU8727 (CSP-SAC), Kenyon Lee McClelland CDCR # T19229 

(CSP-LAC), Easter Burnett CDCR # V35245 (CMF), and Ramon Guillermo Morales-Smith 

CDCR # F21867 (CSP-SAC). Therefore, plaintiff’s reply to defendant Louie’s opposition should 

focus primarily on these potential witnesses. Additionally, plaintiff should inform the court by 

affidavit whether or not his proposed new witness, Timothy Bradford Cole, CDCR #V18610 

(CSP-COR), has agreed to testify voluntarily. 

 

1

 See http://inmatelocator.cdcr.ca.gov/ This Court may take judicial notice of facts that are 

capable of accurate determination by sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. 

See Fed. R. Evid. 201; see also City of Sausalito v. O’Neill, 386 F.3d 1186, 1224 n.2 (9th Cir. 

2004) (“We may take judicial notice of a record of a state agency not subject to reasonable 

dispute.”). 

Case 2:15-cv-02266-DAD-AC Document 90 Filed 02/25/20 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 

3 

 A writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum will issue contemporaneously with this order to 

provide for plaintiff’s presence at trial. Ruling on plaintiff’s other requested writs will follow the 

briefing here ordered. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

 1. Defendants shall file and serve any further opposition to plaintiff’s pending motions on 

or before Friday, March 6, 2020. 

 2. Plaintiff shall file and serve (submit to prison officials for mailing) his reply to Louie’s 

opposition on or before Friday, March 13, 2020. Plaintiff shall not respond to any other matters 

filed by defendants unless ordered by this court. 

 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to send plaintiff, together with a copy of this order: (1) 

a copy of this court’s Discovery and Scheduling Order filed August 11, 2017 (ECF No. 33), and 

(2) a copy of Louie’s opposition filed February 24, 2020 (ECF No. 89). 

 4. A writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum shall issue contemporaneously with this order 

to provide for plaintiff’s presence at trial. 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: February 25, 2020 

Case 2:15-cv-02266-DAD-AC Document 90 Filed 02/25/20 Page 3 of 3