Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_00-cv-03706/USCOURTS-cand-3_00-cv-03706-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 535
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Death Penalty
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID J. CARPENTER,

Petitioner,

v.

ROBERT L. AYERS, Jr., Acting Warden

of California State Prison at San Quentin,

Respondent.

NO. C 98-2444 MMC 

 C-00-3706 MMC

 PROTECTIVE ORDER 

DEATH PENALTY CASES

On the authority of Rule 26(c)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and Bittaker v.

Woodford, 331 F.3d 715, 726-28 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc), 

IT IS ORDERED:

(1) The evaluation and report to the Court provided for in the Order of July 18, 2008, shall be

limited to Mr. Carpenter’s current competency in light of the standards set forth in paragraph 11 of

that Order. Claims in Mr. Carpenter’s habeas corpus petitions other than his claim of current

incompetency shall not be addressed in the evaluation and report. His competency or mental status

at the time of the charged offenses, his trials, or the prior offenses offered in aggravation, or at any

other time, shall not be addressed. 

Case 3:00-cv-03706-MMC Document 115 Filed 08/21/08 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

(2) The results of the evaluation and any information obtained by the evaluator, the Court or

the parties in connection with the evaluation may be used to support or rebut claims contained

within Mr. Carpenter’s currently pending federal habeas petitions. The results and the information

may not be used for any other purposes, including any possible retrial. 

(3) Information obtained during the competency evaluation from Mr. Carpenter or his

counsel may be used to support or rebut claims contained within Mr. Carpenter’s currently pending

federal habeas petitions. The information may not be used for any other purposes, including any

possible retrial. 

(4) Statements made by Mr. Carpenter in the course of the competency evaluation and

testimony by the evaluator based upon any such statements may be used to support or rebut claims

contained within Mr. Carpenter’s currently pending federal habeas petitions. The statements and

testimony may not be used for any other purposes, including any possible retrial.

(5) This Order shall continue in effect after the conclusion of the habeas corpus proceedings

and specifically shall apply in the event of a retrial of all or any portion of Mr. Carpenter’s criminal

cases. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 21, 2008 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:00-cv-03706-MMC Document 115 Filed 08/21/08 Page 2 of 2