Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Hawley

United States District Court, D. Kansas

October 21, 2019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
RYAN HAWLEY, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          Angel D. Mitchell U.S. Magistrate Judge

         This matter comes before the court on non-party CoreCivic Leavenworth Detention Center's (“CoreCivic”) Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum. (ECF No. 34.) For the reasons discussed below, CoreCivic's motion is denied.

         I. BACKGROUND

         On March 6, 2019, defendant Ryan Hawley was indicted with one charge of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g) and 924(a)(2). On July 9, 2019, an information was filed amending this charge; Mr. Hawley waived indictment and pleaded guilty to this amended charge. The court has not yet scheduled his sentencing hearing.

         On September 12, 2019, Mr. Hawley filed a Motion for Production of Documents and Objects Pursuant to Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 17(b) and (c). (ECF No. 30.) The motion requested that the court issue a subpoena to CoreCivic for the following materials:

(1) Video showing the interior of M Pod on September 2, 2019;
(2) Videos showing the interiors of all segregation cells on September 2, 2019;
(3) All disciplinary records for inmate Ryan Hawley (Reg. No. 23595-031);
(4) All records and reports related to, describing, or relevant to an assault on Ryan Hawley in the segregation unit of CCA Leavenworth (rebranded as CoreCivic).

(Id. at 1-2.) Mr. Hawley contended that these materials relate to an instance where he was harmed in custody and are “directly relevant to sentencing in this matter, as the intensity of punishment (including the conditions of confinement) is as relevant as its length.” (Id. at 2.)

         The presiding U.S. District Judge Holly L. Teeter granted Mr. Hawley's motion, finding his subpoena request met the relevance, materiality, and specificity thresholds required under Rule 17(c) and United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974). (ECF No. 31), at 1.) A subpoena was issued that requires CoreCivic to produce the materials sought. (See Id. at 2.) The court directed CoreCivic to comply with the subpoena on or before September 26, 2019. (Id.)

         On September 24, 2019, CoreCivic filed a motion to quash the subpoena. (ECF No. 34.) CoreCivic's motion argues that Mr. Hawley's subpoena seeks information that is not relevant or necessary to prepare an adequate defense. (Id. at 2-3.) CoreCivic also contends that Mr. Hawley's requests are not sufficiently specific, and that he is engaging in an improper fishing expedition designed to gather information that supports civil claims he may have against CoreCivic relating to the conditions of his confinement. (See Id. at 3-4.)

         II. SUBPOENAS ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.