Hooper v. Barden
This text of Hooper v. Barden (Hooper v. Barden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS DELTA DIVISION
DANNY LEE HOOPER ADC #107609 PLAINTIFF
v. No. 2:21-cv-58-DPM
ROOSEVELT BARDEN, Captain Shift Supervisor, EARU DEFENDANT
ORDER 1. | Hooper’s motion in limine, Doc. 86, is granted as modified. Here are the Court's rulings: e Past Criminal Convictions. Granted without objection. e Hooper’s Prison Disciplinary Records. Granted without objection. e Unrelated Grievances and Lawsuits. Granted as modified. Unrelated grievances and lawsuits involving Barden are also excluded. e Street Clothes and Shackles. Granted with a caveat. Hooper and his prison witnesses may appear unshackled and in street clothes. But the Court may amend this ruling, with respect to any inmate, in the interest of courtroom security
after consultation with the U.S. Marshal. Holloway v. Alexander, 957 F.2d 529, 530 (8th Cir. 1992). 2. The parties should prepare for trial the week of February 27th. The older prisoner case set ahead of this one is wobbling. And none of the criminal cases set that week are, at this point, expected to go to trial then. So Ordered.
D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge /0 Socavarsy 2.024
i.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Hooper v. Barden, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hooper-v-barden-ared-2024.