(PC) Saldana v. Spearman

Opinion

SAMUEL SALDANA, No. 2:18-cv-00319-DJC-AC Plaintiff, v. ORDER

M.E. SPEARMAN, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff has filed a Motion for Attendance of an Incarcerated Witness. (ECF No. 112.) Defendant has not opposed Plaintiff’s Motion. In determining whether to grant a motion for attendance of an incarcerated witness, courts will often consider “(1) whether the inmate's presence will substantially further the resolution of the case, (2) the security risks presented by the inmate's presence, (3) the expense of transportation and security, and (4) whether the suit can be stayed until the inmate is released without prejudice to the cause asserted.” Villey v. Machado, No. 1:18-cv-01067-ADA-HBK, 2022 WL 14751480, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2022) (citing Wiggins v. County of Alameda, 717 F.2d 466, 468 n.1 (9th Cir. 1983)). The Court finds that witness Jesus Avila (AE9152) should be brought to testify at trial. Given the apparent relevance of Mr. Avila’s testimony as a witness to the events at issue in this action, Mr. Avila’s presence will substantially further the resolution of this case. There is no evidence before the court that Mr. Avila’s presence presents security risks, that transportation and security for Mr. Avila will create undue expense, or that this action can reasonably be stayed until Mr. Avila is released.’ As noted, Defendant has not opposed Plaintiff's Motion. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for Attendance of an Incarcerated Witness (ECF No. 112) is GRANTED. A writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum to have Jesus Avila (AE9152) brought to court to testify at trial will issue separately. Dated: _July 9, 2024 Donal J Cob tto— Hon. Daniel alabretta " UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE - saldana18cv00319.incar_wit — SSS ' The Court also notes that this case was first filed in 2018. Despite this delay, Plaintiff represents that Mr. Avila remains in custody.