IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

RYAN BUNDY,

Defendant.

3:16-cr-00051-BR-5

 

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT

RYAN BUNDY’S MOTION

(#1299) FOR DECLARATION

OF A MISTRIAL

BROWN, Judge.

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Ryan Bundy’s

Motion (#1299) for Declaration of Mistrial filed September 19,

2016. In that Motion Bundy asserts the Court must declare a

mistrial because Harney County Sheriff David Ward referenced

rough notes that Ryan Bundy contends were not provided to

Defendants in discovery.1 Ryan Bundy does not specify the

1

 In his Motion Ryan Bundy also raises several other

arguments that this Court has already addressed or arguments that

are not legally cognizable issues for this Court to address.

1 - ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT RYAN BUNDY’S MOTION (#1299) FOR

DECLARATION OF A MISTRIAL

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 1375 Filed 09/30/16 Page 1 of 3
portion of Sheriff Ward’s testimony that contains the reference

to any such rough notes taken by Sheriff Ward or any Harney

County deputy sheriff.2

The government filed a Response (#1314) to Ryan Bundy’s

Motion on September 21, 2016. The government contends Sheriff

Ward did not reference any rough notes in his testimony, and, in

any event, such notes would not be material in light of the fact

that the relevant investigatory reports of Ward and the other

members of his office were provided to Defendants in discovery.

The Court has reviewed the transcript of Sheriff Ward’s

testimony. Sheriff Ward did not reference any rough notes that

he took or that were taken by any other law-enforcement official

under his supervision. Moreover, there is not any basis in the

record to conclude any such notes (if they exist) contain

material information that is not contained in the official

reports generated by Sheriff Ward and other law-enforcement

officials under his supervision that were produced to Defendants

in discovery. 

Finally, the Court notes state law enforcement are generally

not required to retain their rough notes unless those notes are

2 The Court notes it has arranged to provide each Defendant

whose defense is funded through the Criminal Justice Act with a

daily rough transcript of trial proceedings. The Court has also

indicated that it will authorize any such Defendant to order an

official transcript of any portion of the trial proceedings that

is necessary to complete the record on any nonfrivolous motion. 

2 - ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT RYAN BUNDY’S MOTION (#1299) FOR

DECLARATION OF A MISTRIAL

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 1375 Filed 09/30/16 Page 2 of 3
otherwise in the possession of the United States. See United

States v. Durham, 941 F.2d 858, 860 (9th Cir. 1991). Here there

is not any basis in the record for the Court to conclude that any

such notes are or ever have been in the possession of the United

States.

Accordingly, on this record the Court DENIES Defendant Ryan

Bundy’s Motion (#1299) for Declaration of Mistrial.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 30th day of September, 2016.

/s/ Anna J. Brown

 

ANNA J. BROWN

United States District Judge

3 - ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT RYAN BUNDY’S MOTION (#1299) FOR

DECLARATION OF A MISTRIAL

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 1375 Filed 09/30/16 Page 3 of 3