Nailor v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
- Beth Freeman
- 5:20-cv-00724
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Nailor v. Fisher, Judge Freeman granted a sealing request and paused the habeas case until counsel could be appointed for a competency hearing.
Duane A. Nailor's federal challenge to his state conviction was paused, and the probation report was placed under seal. Counsel was to be appointed for the limited purpose of conducting a competency hearing.
What happened
Duane A. Nailor, a state prisoner without a lawyer, challenged his state conviction in a petition seeking federal review. The respondent filed an answer and asked to seal a probation report because it contained confidential personal information.
The court found good cause and granted the motion to file the probation report under seal. The order terminated the docket entry concerning that motion.
The court also paused the matter until counsel is appointed for the limited purpose of conducting a competency hearing. Judge Beth Freeman issued the order on January 7, 2021.
The detailed version
- Nailor v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation · No. 5:20-cv-00724
- Beth Freeman
- Jan. 7, 2021
Background
Duane A. Nailor, identified in the opinion as a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his state conviction in Alameda County Superior Court. The respondent filed an answer and an administrative motion to file a probation report under seal. The motion cited California rules providing that personal information in a probation report is confidential.
Rulings
The court found good cause and granted the motion to file the probation report under seal. The order states that the ruling terminated Docket No. 10.
The court had referred the matter to the Federal Pro Se Program for limited appointment of counsel to conduct a competency hearing. It stayed, or paused, the matter until counsel is appointed. The opinion’s excerpt ends after stating, “If counsel disagrees with” and does not provide the rest of that sentence.
Effect of the Order
The order addressed confidentiality and the appointment of counsel; it did not decide whether Nailor’s challenge to his conviction should succeed. Judge Beth Freeman signed the order on January 7, 2021.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.