Federal Public Defender
2 Ken Murray IgOh1o Bar N0. 00025198
Jefferson 'I. orsely genn. Bar No. 15434)
3 Assistant Federal u lic Defenders
850 West Adams Street Suite 201
4 Phoenix, Arigona 85007
l
602 382-2816
6 602 889-3960 fax
7 Counsel for Petitioner
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
IO Robert L. Jaramillo, No. CV-00-0936-PHX-SMM
1 1 Petitioner, JOINT NOTICE RE: EXHIBITS
I2 VS.
I3 Dora B. Schriro, et al.,
I4 Respondents.
I5
I6 On July 29, 2005, the parties exchanged exhibits lists and exhibits. The
]7 Exhibit list provided to Respondents by Petitioner, Robert L. J aramillo, is attached
jg hereto as Exhibit A. The Exhibit list provided to Petitioner by Respondents is
j 9 attached hereto as Exhibit B. The parties also provided opposing counsel with copies
20 of each exhibit referenced in their respective exhibit lists.
2] The parties provide this notice to inform the Court which exhibits have been
22 stipulated to or are objected to, and the reasons for such objections.
23 Position of Petitioner
24 Mr. J aramillo has no objection to the introduction into evidence of Exhibits 50,
25 55, 60, 65a, 75, 84a-d, 85-86, 89-92, 95, and 104-106 from Respondents’ Exhibit list.
26 Mr. J aramillo objects to the mass introduction of Q of the autopsy
27 photographs, Exhibits 87a through n and 88a through i, as irrelevant and needlessly
28 repetitive and cumulative. Mr. Jaramillo does not ob_ject to the foundation and
I
ase 2:OO—cv—OO936-SI\/II\/I Document 164 Filed 08/O3/2005 Paget of4
1 authenticity of the photographs but does believe that limitation of the number of
2 photographs admitted is appropriate. Mr. Jaramillo reserves the right to object to
3 specific photograph exhibits based on the testimony of the medical examiners at the
4 evidentiary hearing.
5 Mr. Jaramillo objects to Exhibits 51-54, 56-58, 59a-d, 61a-b, 62a-b, 63-64,
6 65b, 66-74, 76-83, 93-94, 96-103, and 109 to the extent he has objected to the
7 introduction of such evidence in his Responses to the pending Motions in Limine
8 filed by Respondents [Docs. No. 70, 73, 75, 90, 92, 93, 108, and 111-115]. In the
9 event the Court holds that any or all ofthe exhibits are admissible, Mr. J aramillo will
10 not object on f`oundationa1 or authenticity grounds.
11 Mr. Jaramillo objects to the introduction of Exhibit 107. The photograph
12 appears to be of a scene, possibly a crime scene with blood stains on the floor, that
13 to Mr. J aramil1o’s knowledge has no bearing or relevance to this case. Mr. Jaramillo
14 also objects to the various certificates, letters, and performance evaluations (some of
15 which are not filled out) of Joseph Savalas as irrelevant, hearsay, and a violation of
16 the right to confrontation.
17 Finally, Mr. J aramillo objects to the portions of Exhibit 84c that he has argued
18 violate his right to confrontation} Petitioner’s Motion to Preclude Admission of
19 Testimonial Hearsay [Doe. No. 67] was lodged on February 14, 2005 and remains
20 pending. Mr. Jaramillo maintains his objection to Respondents’ Exhibit 84c and the
21 associated reports in Mr. Jaramillo’s Exhibits 1, and 6-13, pending this Court’s mling
22 on his motion.
23
24 'Mr. Jaramillo has included as his Exhibit 1 the 89 page report that is included
25 in Res·pondents’ Exhibit 84c. Mr. Jaramillo also included portions of his Exhibit 1
26 as separate exhibits for use with individual witnesses. By including them in
27 Retitioner’s Exhibit List, Mr. J aramillo does not intend to waive the objectionsset
forth in his pretrial motions. In the event the Court mles in his favor, Mr. Jaramillo
28 will not offer the offending exhibits.
2
ase 2:OO—cv—OO936-SI\/II\/I Document 164 Filed 08/O3/2005 Page 2 of 4
1 Respondents’ Position
2 Respondents have no objections to Petitioner’s Exhibits 1-20 and 28-32.
3 Respondents object to Petitioner’s Exhibits 21-27 to the extent they have objected to
4 the introduction of such evidence in their Motion in Limine Re: Former Deputy Pinal
5 County Attorney Barry McNaughten (sic). [Doc. No. 109]. In the event the Court
6 determines that any, or all, exhibits are admissible, Respondents will not object on
7 foundational or authenticity grounds.
8 Respectfully submitted this 3rd day of August, 2005.
9 Terry Goddard Jon Sands _
Attorney General Federal Public Defender
10 Robert A. Walsh Ken Murray
I 1 Jefferson . Dorsey
12 By s/ Robert A. Walsh By s/ Ken Murra
13 Counsel for Respondents Counsel for Petitioner
14 CERTIFICATE FOR MULTIPLE SIGNATURE
15 _ I certify that the content of this document is acceptable to all persons reguired
_ to sign and that telcghonic authorization for electronic signature was obtaine from
16 counsel for Respon ents.
17
Jon Sands _
18 Federal Public Defender
Ken Murrray
19 Jefferson . Dorsey
20
By s/ Ken Murra
2l Counsel for Petitioner
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
ase 2:OO—cv—OO936-SIVIIVI Document 164 Filed 08/O3/2005 Page 3 of 4
l CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
2 I hereby certify that on this 3rd da of A_ugust* 2005, I electronically
transmitted the attached document to the Clerijs Qftice using the CM/ECF_System
3 for filrn g and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following registrants:
4
5 i1}I(s)g(:s1ti1r1‘§.i&£g>l1§1iqey General
6
7 By s/ Regina Montoya
ega ecretary _
8 Capital Habeas Unit
9
l0
l l
l2
I3
14
I5
I6
l7
l8
19
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
ase 2:OO—cv—OO936-SI\/II\/I Document 164 Filed 08/O3/2005 Page 4 of 4
Case 2:00-cv-00936-SMM
Document 164
Filed 08/03/2005
Page 1 of 4
Case 2:00-cv-00936-SMM
Document 164
Filed 08/03/2005
Page 2 of 4
Case 2:00-cv-00936-SMM
Document 164
Filed 08/03/2005
Page 3 of 4
Case 2:00-cv-00936-SMM
Document 164
Filed 08/03/2005
Page 4 of 4
United States Free Forms
Canada Free Forms
United Kingdom Free Forms
Australia Free Forms