Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-2_05-cv-02107/USCOURTS-arwd-2_05-cv-02107-2/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

---

AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

FORT SMITH DIVISION

RICKEY DALE NEWMAN PETITIONER

v. CASE NO. 05-2107

LARRY NORRIS, Director,

Arkansas Department of Correction RESPONDENT

ORDER

Currently before the Court is Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to

Conduct Discovery on Claim VIII (Incompetence to Stand Trial) (Doc.

29). Petitioner’s counsel asserts that the request will assist in the

development of facts to support Petitioner’s mental health-related

claims for relief. Id. Respondent advises the Court that they have

no objection to Petitioner’s discovery request. Petitioner

specifically requests :

A. Subpoenas duces tecum to the following entities and

individuals:

1. Arkansas Department of Correction, requiring production

of any and all records maintained regarding Mr. Newman including, by

way of illustration only and not limitation, mental health, medical,

classification, disciplinary, grievance, housing, transportation,

visitation and telephone records, in whatever form maintained,

including but not limited to forms, reports, charts, notes, test

protocols and raw data, recorded impressions, graphs, laboratory

results, photographs, computer files or other recordings, for Mr.

Newman’s current and all prior periods of incarceration. 

Case 2:05-cv-02107-RTD Document 35 Filed 08/22/06 Page 1 of 4 PageID #: <pageID>
AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

2

2. Arkansas State Hospital, requiring production of any and

all records, reports, charts, notes, forms, graphs, test protocols and

raw data, background and social history documents gathered from other

institutions and individuals, photographs, written impressions,

computer files or other recordings maintained regarding the

hospitalizations, examinations and evaluations of Petitioner,

including but not limited to evaluations conducted in 1977, 2002 and

2004.

3. Nancy Warren, court reporter, for the audiotape

recording of all proceedings in Mr. Newman’s trial, including but not

limited to the portion containing the testimony of Mr. Newman.

B. An Order from the Court directing the Arkansas Department of

Health and Human Services to provide Mr. Newman’s counsel with a

certified copy of Mr. Newman’s original birth record. 

C. Depositions of the following individuals:

1. Robert Marquette, trial counsel for Mr. Newman.

Additionally, direction that Mr. Marquette will produce at that

deposition all files and records maintained by him in connection with

Mr. Newman.

2. Dr. Charles Mallory, Arkansas State Hospital, who

conducted a psychological evaluation of Mr. Newman prior to his trial.

(Doc. 29.) 

There are times in which prehearing discovery is essential. The

Advisory Committee Notes to Rule 6 approve the use of discovery in

Case 2:05-cv-02107-RTD Document 35 Filed 08/22/06 Page 2 of 4 PageID #: <pageID>
AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

3

appropriate cases before an evidentiary hearing has been granted. The

record in this case should be expanded due to the lack of such

information at the state court level. Discovery at this point will

allow facts to be presented to the Court to assist in the question of

whether an evidentiary hearing is warranted and on what claims the

Court will review on their merits. Furthermore, discovery should be

liberally granted in capital cases. McFarland v. Scott, 512 U.S. 849,

860 (1994) (O’Connor, J., concurring in the judgment in part); accord

id. at 855 (majority opinion). Petitioner has made a sufficient

showing of good cause for discovery; specifically showing that if the

facts are fully developed, he may be able to demonstrate that he has

mental health issues and/or is actually innocent of the crime, thus,

ultimately entitled to relief. See Bracy v. Gramley, 520 U.S. 899

(1997). Upon due consideration, Petitioner’s motion is GRANTED.

It is ordered that the requested subpoenas duces tecum be issued,

and subpoenas issued directing Robert Marquette and Dr. Charles

Mallory to attend depositions, such depositions will cover any and all

relevant subjects regarding Petitioner and his habeas petition and not

be limited to Claim VIII. Robert Marquette’s subpoena will direct him

to produce at the deposition all files and records maintained by him

in connection with Petitioner. Additionally, the Arkansas Department

of Health and Human Services is ordered to provide Mr. Newman’s

counsel with a certified copy of Petitioner’s original birth record.

Case 2:05-cv-02107-RTD Document 35 Filed 08/22/06 Page 3 of 4 PageID #: <pageID>
AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

4

IT IS SO ORDERED this 22 day of August 2006. nd

 /S/ Robert T. Dawson 

Robert T. Dawson

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-02107-RTD Document 35 Filed 08/22/06 Page 4 of 4 PageID #: <pageID>