Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01146/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01146-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GUADALUPE G. GONZALEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

MERCED COUNTY; MERCED COUNTY

SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; JOHN

McKNIGHT, individually and in

his official capacity as a

Sheriff’s Deputy with the Merced

County Sheriff’s Department;

JASON COPE, individually and in

his official capacity as a

Sheriff’s Deputy with the Merced

County Sheriff’s Department; and

DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, 

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:07-cv-1146 OWW SMS

ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES

TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION

OF DOCUMENTS, SET NO. ONE

(DOCS. 21 & 23)

Plaintiff is proceeding with a civil action in this court. 

The matter has been referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rules 72-302(c)(1) and 72-303.

Pending before the Court is a motion to compel production of

documents filed by Plaintiff, on March 24, 2008, and again on

April 3, 2008, including a joint statement of discovery dispute

together with exhibits attached thereto. 

On April 18, 2008, Plaintiff’s motion came on regularly for

Case 1:07-cv-01146-OWW -SMS Document 27 Filed 05/01/08 Page 1 of 6
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

hearing at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom 7 before the Honorable Sandra

M. Snyder, United States Magistrate Judge. Peter N. Kapetan

appeared on behalf of Plaintiff Guadalupe G. Gonzalez. Chief of

Civil Litigation for Merced County, Roger S. Matzkind, appeared

on behalf of all Defendants. Based on the stipulation of counsel

set forth in the conclusion of the joint statement, namely that

the parties have agreed to an in camera review by the court of

the evidence brought to court by the Defendants, the matter was

submitted to the Court for decision. 

I. Request for Production of Documents No. 14:

Any and all DOCUMENTS relating to any

investigation YOU have commenced, undertaken,

or are currently undertaking, including but

not limited to, audio tapes, transcripts, and

summaries of statements of witnesses, Merced

County Sheriff Department personnel, or other

emergency medical services Personnel;

complaints; investigative reports; fact

findings; recommendations; records of

discipline imposed; and DOCUMENTS evidencing

the identities of the persons conducting or

participating in such investigation; and any

other material created or generated as part

of such investigations relating to the EVENTS

of February 15, 2007, which is subject matter

of this litigation.

The documents provided to the Court for in camera review

contained no documents of any kind referencing this request. 

Either no internal investigation was conducted or any such

reports of an investigation have already been produced by

Defendants to Plaintiff. The Court is assuming that any and all

reports dealing directly with the incident that is the subject of

this lawsuit have already been produced pursuant to FRCP

26(a)(1). 

Case 1:07-cv-01146-OWW -SMS Document 27 Filed 05/01/08 Page 2 of 6
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

3

II. Request for Production of Documents No. 16:

Any and all DOCUMENTS relating to any

complaints of excessive use of force, assault

and battery, false arrest or imprisonment,

negligence, violations of civil rights,

falsifying police reports, or acts of moral

turpitude against Defendant Deputy Jason Cope

and/or Deputy John McKnight, including, but

not limited to, any complaints, and other

DOCUMENTS evidencing the identities, Names

and addresses of the complaining persons.

The documents provided to the Court for in camera review

contained one citizen complaint made against Deputy Cope only. 

As the narrative provided by the complainant is rambling and

makes little sense, it is difficult for this Court to discern if

the 5/15/07 complaint is even remotely relevant to the

allegations in this underlying action. However, the Court hereby

provides the name and contact information for the complainant:

James Barrett - 7102 W. Winton Way; no city listed, 

but assume Merced, CA; Telephone: (209) 358-0448.

III. Request for Production of Documents No. 17:

Any and all DOCUMENTS relating to

investigations commenced, undertaken, or

currently being undertaken by the Internal

Affairs Unit of the Merced County Sheriff’s

Department regarding complaints of excessive

force, assault and battery, false arrest or

imprisonment, negligence, violations of civil

rights, falsifying Police reports, or acts of

moral turpitude against Defendant Deputy

Jason Cope and/or Deputy John McKnight,

including, but not limited to, audio tapes,

transcripts of summaries of witnesses’

statements; investigative reports; fact

findings; recommendations; records of

discipline imposed; any documents evidencing

the identities of the persons conducting and

participating in such investigations; and any

other material created or generated as part

of an investigation of such complaint.

Case 1:07-cv-01146-OWW -SMS Document 27 Filed 05/01/08 Page 3 of 6
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

4

The documents provided to the Court for in camera review

contained no documents of any kind referencing this request.

IV. Request for Production of Documents No. 22:

All documents relating to Defendant Jason

Cope’s employment history with the Merced

County Sheriff’s Department, including, but

not limited to, records of positions held,

promotions, any disciplinary actions, any

suspensions, and any intentions to terminate.

The documents provided to the Court for in camera review

reveal that Deputy Jason Cope was originally hired as a Reserve

Deputy Level I on January 20, 2004. Of the 16 pages associated

with his new-hire, none appear to be of potential interest to

Plaintiff; the pages consist of signing off on the terms and

conditions of what it means to be “Extra-Help,” copies of his CA

driver’s license and social security card, and several

acknowledgments of receipt of policies such as the penalties for

misuse of CLETS information available to law enforcement,

receiving a copy of the County’s Injury and Illness Prevention

Program, drug-free conditions of employment, sexual harassment

policies, child abuse reporting statement, computer and data

network appropriate use policy, etc. There is no copy of any

application of employment in Deputy Cope’s personnel file.

There is a section of evaluation summaries of Deputy Cope’s

periodic on-the-job ratings. The Court has read them all and

finds, in the main, satisfactory or better ratings. The only

notations of “weak” rating appear on the evaluation of 1/24/07

and references not following regulations by leaving his assigned

beat area without permission to make vehicle stops or otherwise

Case 1:07-cv-01146-OWW -SMS Document 27 Filed 05/01/08 Page 4 of 6
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

5

respond to calls that are beyond his assignment. Deputy Cope was

counseled regarding his behavior, and the evaluation reports

noted improvement.

If Plaintiff wishes copies of Deputy Cope’s evaluation

summaries, he is to notify Defendants’ counsel for production of

same. Note: The Court orders that any production of documents

pursuant to this order should be made in conjunction with a

protective order that Defendants’ counsel drafts for signatures

of all parties. Too, the Court believes that copies of personnel

records of law enforcement officers should be for attorney’s and

their expert’s eyes only, that no copies of the copies should be

made, and that all copies be destroyed or returned directly to

Defendants at the conclusion of litigation.

V. Request for Production of Documents No. 23:

All documents relating to Defendant John

McKnight’s employment history with the Merced

County Sheriff’s Department, including, but

not limited to, records of positions held,

promotions, any disciplinary actions, any

suspensions, and any intentions to terminate.

The documents provided for the Court’s in camera review

reveal that Deputy Jonathan McKnight was hired on June 18, 1996,

as a Deputy Sheriff I. As with Deputy Pope’s file, there is

nothing else responsive to the request, i.e., nothing regarding

positions held, promotions, disciplinary actions, etc. In the

evaluation section of Deputy McKnight’s file, there are many more

reports than in Deputy Cope’s file. He is praised highly over

the years with ratings in the “good” and “excellent” categories. 

In 2004, Deputy McKnight was rated “weak” regarding use of time;

Case 1:07-cv-01146-OWW -SMS Document 27 Filed 05/01/08 Page 5 of 6
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

6

he was counseled regarding using too much sick leave time. As

with Deputy Cope, should Plaintiff wish copies of Deputy

McKnight’s periodic employment evaluations, Defendants shall so

provide them with the same conditions as set forth by the Court

in section IV above. 

Conclusion

Counsel for Defendants shall make arrangements to pick up

the documents left for the Court’s review at their earliest

convenience. Contact Courtroom Deputy Harriet Herman to make

arrangements: (559) 499-5692.

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 30, 2008 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-01146-OWW -SMS Document 27 Filed 05/01/08 Page 6 of 6