(PC) Stewart v. De La Cruz

Opinion

1 Order 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ERICK LATON STEWART SR., Case No. 1:20-cv-00978-HBK (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 13 v. (Doc. No. 45) 14 A. DE LA CRUZ and J. MIRAMONTES, 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 Pending before the Court is pro se Plaintiff’s motion for a directed verdict filed December 20 10, 2024. (Doc. No. 45). Plaintiff requests that he be administered a polygraph test to prove he is 21 telling the truth to resolve this claim and that, afterwards, a directed verdict be entered in his 22 favor. (Id. at 1). 23 The Court previously denied Plaintiff’s motions seeking the administration of a polygraph 24 test and incorporates its reasoning as though set forth at length herein. (See Doc. Nos. 35, 42). 25 Further, Plaintiff is advised that even if he did undergo a polygraph test the results of such test 26 would not be deemed admissible for the purpose Plaintiff seeks to have the results admitted. The 27 Ninth Circuit has indicated that polygraph evidence can be relevant and thus admissible when the 28 polygraph evidence is being offered not to prove the truth of the polygraph test results, but only to 1 | prove that the polygraph test was offered and/or administered. 2 It is well settled in this circuit that polygraph evidence is disfavored and cannot be introduced into evidence to establish the truth of the 3 statements made during the examination. Thus, if the evidence is being offered to prove the truth or falsity of the polygraph results, 4 then the evidence is inadmissible. 5 || United States v. Bowen, 857 F.2d 1337, 1341 (9th Cir. 1988). 6 Finally, a directed verdict is proper at trial only where the evidence permits only one 7 | reasonable conclusion as to the verdict. Peterson v. Kennedy, 771 F.2d 1244, 1256 (9th 8 | Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1122, 106 S.Ct. 1642, 90 L.Ed.2d 187 (1986). 9 Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 10 Plaintiff's motion for a polygraph examination and for a directed verdict (Doc. No. 45) is 11 | DENIED. 12 'S | Dated: _ December 16, 2024 Mihaw. fares Zackte 14 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA Is UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28