Budd v. Bean
Budd v. Bean
Trial Court Opinion
2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA
5 OK 6GLENFORD BUDD, Case No. 2:16-cv-00613-RFB-BNW 7 Petitioner, ORDER 3 v.
9 JEREMY BEAN, et al., 10 Respondents. 11 12 Upon review of the exhibits filed for this habeas matter, the Court notes Respondents failed 13 | to file under seal or redact the Presentence Report. The Presentence Report is “confidential and must not be made a part of any public record.” NRS § 176.156(5). Under Kamakana v. City and 15 | County of Honolulu,
447 F.3d 1172(9th Cir. 2006), and its progeny, a compelling need to protect 16 | Petitioner’s safety, privacy, and/or personal identifying information outweighs the public interest 17 | in open access to court records. Respondents additionally failed to fully redact the exhibit filed as 18 | ECF No. 55-1, as required by LR IC 6-1(a)(3) (“If an individual’s date of birth must be included, 19 | only the year should be used.”). 20 THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within 15 days of the entry of this 21 | Order, Respondents must file a redacted version of the document filed as ECF No. 55-1. 22 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall seal the documents filed as 23 | ECF Nos. 55-1 and 56-3. 94 DATED: June 3, 2025 ; 25 < 26 RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 28
Reference
- Status
- Unknown