Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_97-cv-06210/USCOURTS-caed-1_97-cv-06210-21/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 535
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Death Penalty
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN LEE HOLT,

Petitioner,

vs.

Vince Cullen,* as Warden of San Quentin

State Prison,

Respondent.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 1:97-cv-06210 AWI

DEATH PENALTY CASE

ORDER GRANTING IN PART

PETITIONER’S REQUEST TO CLARIFY

OR MODIFY SEPTEMBER 8, 2008

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Hearing Date: March 22, 2011

VACATED

The matter is before the Court on the request of Petitioner John Lee Holt (“Holt”) to clarify the

provisions of an earlier stipulated protective order entered on September 8, 2008 (doc. 193). The motion

includes as exhibits correspondence between counsel for Holt and counsel for Respondent, Vince

Cullen, as Warden of San Quentin State Prison (the “Warden”). The Court has reviewed Holt’s moving

papers, together with the attached exhibits and finds that further briefing from the Warden is not

necessary to rule on the motion. The hearing scheduled for the motion, on March 22, 2011, is vacated.

BACKGROUND

On November 21, 2008, the Court issued an order granting Holt’s motion to stay these federal

proceedings pursuant to Rohan ex rel. Gates v. Woodford, 334 F.3d 803 (9th Cir. 2003), on the grounds

that he is incompetent to proceed with and assist his counsel in prosecuting this litigation. The Gates

stay order was informed bythe confidential report of Roderick D. Ponath, M.D., a psychiatrist employed

by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”), which concluded that Holt

suffers from a mental disease, disorder, or defect, and further that Holt does not have the capacity to

* Vince Cullen, as Warden of San Quentin State Prison, is substituted for his predecessor Robert L. Ayers, Jr. pursuant to

97dp6210.OGrantPetnrReq2ClarifyProtectiveOrd.Hlt.wpd 1 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d).

Case 1:97-cv-06210-KES Document 203 Filed 02/16/11 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

appreciate his position, make rational choices with respect to the proceedings in this Court, or to

communicate rationally with his appointed attorneys regarding the proceedings (doc. 199). Holt filed

Dr. Ponath’s report under seal on October 30, 2008, but served it on the Warden pursuant to the

September 8, 2008 protective order now under consideration. That protective order prohibits the parties

from disclosing the foundation for or content of Dr. Ponath’s report to any other persons or agencies and

proscribes any such foundation or content to be offered or admitted into evidence by or against Holt on

any issue other than Holt’s competence to proceed with this federal habeas corpus litigation. 

In the Gatesstay order, the Court directed the parties to arrange for Holt to be reexamined by Dr.

Ponath or another psychiatrist employed with the CDCR every two years to determine whether there has

been a material change in his mental condition. On November 11, 2010, another CDCR employed

psychiatrist, Robbin Broadman, M.D., examined Holt and reviewed his (Holt’s) medical records. 

According to the status report of Assistant Federal DefenderJennifer Mann, Dr. Broadman’s conclusion

was that there is no material change in Holt’s mental condition since the November 21, 2008 order. 

Although Holt, through counsel, initially sought to file Dr. Broadman’s report with the Court under seal,

this procedure was not required under the November 21, 2008 Gates stay order. All that was required

was for counsel to file a status report, which Holt’s counsel did.

Holt reports that on September 1, 2010, the California Supreme Court issued an Order to Show

Cause (returnable to the Kern County Superior Court) on the issue of whether he is mentally retarded

and therefore exempt from execution under Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002). Prior to filing the

within motion, Holt attempted secure the Warden’s agreement that both Dr. Ponath’s and Dr.

Broadman’s reports are relevant to Holt’s amenability to psychological testing in the Atkins proceedings

and that the September 8, 2008 protective order be modified to permit use of both reports in those state

proceedings. As reflected in correspondence appended to the present motion, the Warden opposes the

proposed modification because it violates the intent of the protective order, to confine use of those

reports to Holt’s competence to proceed with this federal habeas corpus litigation.

ALTERNATIVE RELIEF REQUESTED

Holt requests the Court to enter one of two orders. In the first alternative, the Court would order

that Dr. Broadman’s report is not subject to the September 8, 2008 protective order. This would permit

97dp6210.OGrantPetnrReq2ClarifyProtectiveOrd.Hlt.wpd 2

Case 1:97-cv-06210-KES Document 203 Filed 02/16/11 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

Holt and his attorneys to use Dr. Broadman’s report in the Atkins litigation pending in the Kern County

Superior Court. The second alternative would broaden the September 8, 2008 protective orderto include

Dr. Broadman’s report, and all subsequent reports on the issue of Holt’s competence to proceed in this

federal habeas corpus litigation with the exception that both parties and their experts would be permitted

to use the existing reports of Drs. Ponath and Broadman as well as any subsequent reports on the issue

of Holt’s competence in the Atkins proceedings before the Kern County Superior Court.

DISCUSSION

The Court agrees with the Warden’s position, as expressed in his correspondence to Holt, that

the intention of the parties in submitting the stipulated protective order, which ultimately was filed on

September 8, 2008, was to maintain the confidentiality of competence examinations conducted by

qualified CDCR medical personnel and prohibit the use by either party of the foundation for or content

of reports memorializing those competence examinations for any purpose other than assessing Holt’s

competence under the Gates stay order issued on November 21, 2008. Holt’s second alternative

requested relief, without the exception, is the appropriate clarification of the September 8, 2008

protective order.

FOR GOOD CAUSE APPEARING,

Holt’s Motion to Clarify or Modify Protective Order is GRANTED in part. 

The September 8, 2008 protective order (doc. 193) is modified to include the report to CDCR

psychiatrist Robbin Broadman, M.D., and all subsequent reports on the issue of Holt’s competence to

proceed with his federal habeas corpus proceedings before this Court. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATE: February 16, 2011 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii

Anthony W. Ishii

 United States District Judge

97dp6210.OGrantPetnrReq2ClarifyProtectiveOrd.Hlt.wpd 3

Case 1:97-cv-06210-KES Document 203 Filed 02/16/11 Page 3 of 3