Summary
This United States District Court order resolves several pending motions in a capital habeas corpus petition brought by James Ray Walker. The court grants in part Walker's motion for leave to conduct discovery regarding alleged Brady violations and ineffective assistance of counsel, while narrowing overly broad requests. Additionally, the court grants Walker's motion to defer adjudication on cause and prejudice and defers ruling on his motion for an evidentiary hearing until after discovery and merits briefing are completed.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court may authorize discovery under Rule 6(a) of the Rules Governing §2254 Cases for a habeas petitioner who shows good cause.
- Whether the district court may defer adjudication of cause and prejudice until after discovery is completed.
Holdings
- The court may grant discovery under Rule 6(a) when the petitioner shows good cause and the discovery may support a claim, but the scope of discovery is discretionary and may be limited.
- The court may defer adjudication of cause and prejudice and hold the evidentiary hearing in abeyance pending completion of discovery and briefing on the merits.
Key quotations
“Rule 6(a) makes it clear that the scope and extent of such discovery is a matter confided to the discretion of the District Court.” (at 6)
Factual background
James Ray Walker was convicted of conspiracy to commit robbery, burglary, two counts of robbery with a deadly weapon, attempted murder with a deadly weapon, and first‑degree murder with a deadly weapon. He alleges that the State withheld Brady evidence concerning witness Eloise Kline and that his trial counsel were ineffective for failing to investigate investigator Peter Baldonado.
Procedural history
Walker was convicted in the Eighth Judicial District Court for Nevada of multiple offenses including first‑degree murder. He filed a habeas petition in the District Court of Nevada. The district court considered his motions as described.