Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_95-cv-01451/USCOURTS-caed-2_95-cv-01451-8/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FERDINAND REYNOLDS, )

) 2:95-cv-1451-GEB-DAD

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) ORDER

)

THEODORE WHITE, Warden; IVALEE )

HENRY; and STANLEY WANG, )

)

Defendants. )

)

An evidentiary hearing was conducted in this action on

August 6, 2007, on the issue whether Plaintiff Ferdinand Reynolds’s

waiver of his right to a jury trial was conditional upon the bench

trial being held before the magistrate judge. 

Reynolds testified at the August 6 hearing that his jury

trial waiver, which was made through his then attorney James J.

Falcone, was so conditioned. Reynolds supported his position with a

letter he received from his attorney dated November 8, 1999, in which

Falcone informed Reynolds of his two options if he were to waive a

jury trial: “try the case in front of [Judge] Burrell, or before

Magistrate [Judge] Drozd.” But, Reynolds’s testimony was contradicted

by Falcone’s testimony, by the excerpt of the trial proceeding during

Case 2:95-cv-01451-JAM-JDP Document 261 Filed 08/14/07 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

which Reynolds contends he tried to tell Judge Burrell about his

conditional waiver of a jury, and by Reynolds’s own statements during

the August 6 evidentiary hearing where he failed to explain why he did

not tell Judge Burrell about the alleged conditional waiver.

Falcone’s testimony reveals that Reynolds’s waiver was not

conditional on the magistrate judge being the trial judge. Further,

the Attorney General did not consent to a trial before the magistrate

judge.

Additionally, the partial trial transcript evidences that

when Reynolds tried to speak to Judge Burrell at trial, it was when

Falcone was making an argument against Defendants’ motion under Rule

50(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Reynolds argued at the

August 6 hearing that he did try to get Falcone to tell Judge Burrell

about the conditional waiver, but Falcone did not respond. When

Reynolds was asked at the evidentiary hearing why he did not ask

Falcone a second time to tell Judge Burrell about the waiver, Reynolds 

stated that he was too depressed to say anything again because of his

bipolar disorder. His testimony is disbelieved. 

Therefore, Reynolds’s waiver of a jury trial was not

conditioned on a bench trial being held before the magistrate judge. 

Accordingly, the jury trial set to commence on September 18, 2007 is

vacated.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 14, 2007

 

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:95-cv-01451-JAM-JDP Document 261 Filed 08/14/07 Page 2 of 2