Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_98-cv-00882/USCOURTS-azd-2_98-cv-00882-5/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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Michael Apelt, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Charles L. Ryan, et al., 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-98-00882-PHX-ROS

DEATH PENALTY CASE

ORDER

On May 13, 2010, this Court substituted Emily Skinner for Patrick McGillicuddy as

co-counsel for Petitioner and required former co-counsel McGillicuddy to file an affidavit

with the Court verifying that he had complied with LRCiv 83.2(e), incorporating the State

Rules of Professional Conduct, in particular E.R., 1.16. (Dkt. 227.) On May 20, 2010,

counsel McGillicuddy lodged a sealed affidavit with the Court in compliance with this

Court’s Order. (Dkt. 231.) Pending before the Court, McGillicuddy moves to seal the

affidavit he filed. (Dkt. 230.)

McGillicuddy contends that the information submitted in the affidavit should not be

public record. (Dkt. 230 at 1.) Every court has supervisory power over its own records and

files. See Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978). However,

unless a particular court record is one traditionally kept secret, such as grand jury transcripts

or warrant materials in the midst of a pre-indictment investigation, a strong presumption of

public access is the starting point. See Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d

Case 2:98-cv-00882-ROS Document 237 Filed 06/07/10 Page 1 of 2
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 -

1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). A party seeking to seal a judicial record bears the burden of

overcoming this strong presumption of public access to judicial records. Id. at 1178-80

(discussing both the compelling reasons standard and the good cause standard for

overcoming the presumption of public access). Here, McGillicuddy does not provide an

adequate rationale for overcoming the presumption of public access to the judicial record at

issue. Moreover, the Court has reviewed McGillicuddy’s affidavit and there is nothing in the

affidavit warranting an assessment of confidentiality. 

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED denying McGillicuddy’s motion to seal his affidavit.

(Dkt. 230.) The Clerk of the Court shall file McGillicuddy’s sealed lodged affidavit as a

public document. 

DATED this 7th day of June, 2010.

Case 2:98-cv-00882-ROS Document 237 Filed 06/07/10 Page 2 of 2