Woodward v. United States Department of Justice


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MARIO DION WOODWARD, : : Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 18-1249 (RC) : v. : Re Document No.: 40, 43 : U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE, : : Defendant. : MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S RENEWED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S RENEWED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Mario Dion Woodward filed the FOIA request at issue in this case seeking records pertaining to the use of any cell phone tracking technology during the criminal investigation that ultimately led to his conviction of capital murder and death sentence. He believes that investigating authorities, including members of the United States Marshals Service (“USMS”), may have used cellphone tracking technology without a warrant in furtherance of that investigation. This Court previously considered and rejected both parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment, finding that in camera review of the responsive documents and further explanation of the agency’s withholdings was required. Woodward v. U.S. Marshals Serv., 534 F. Supp. 3d 121, slip op. at 16 (D.D.C. 2021) [hereinafter “Mem. Op.”]. The USMS has now submitted the unredacted documents for in camera review, see Notice of In Camera Submission, ECF No. 39, and has renewed its Motion for Summary Judgment, see Def.’s Renewed Mot. Summ. J. (“Def.’s Mot.”), ECF No. 40. Mr. Woodward has opposed that motion, see Mem. L. Opp’n to Def.’s Renewed Mot. Summ. J. (“Pl.’s Opp’n”), ECF No. 42, and has filed his own Renewed Cross- Motion for Summary Judgment, see Pl.’s Renewed Cross-Mot. Summ. J. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 (“Pl.’s Cross-Mot.”), ECF No. 43, which the USMS has opposed, see Reply in Supp. Def.’s Renewed Mot. Summ. J. & Opp’n Pl.’s Cross-Mot. Summ. J. (“Def.’s Reply & Opp’n”), ECF No. 45. The Court will grant in part and deny in part both motions. II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 1 Plaintiff Mario Dion Woodward is currently on death row for the murder of Officer Keith Houts of the Montgomery Police Department in 2006. Def.’s Mot. at 2; Pl.’s Cross-Mot. at 6. Mr. Woodward, who was identified as a suspect in the shooting, was located and arrested by the USMS the next day in Atlanta, Georgia. Id. He was indicted, tried, and convicted by a jury in August 2008 in Alabama. Id. “At sentencing, the judge overrode the jury’s recommendation of a sentence of life without the possibility of parole and, instead, imposed a death sentence.” Mem. Op. at 7. Mr. Woodward believes that the investigation which preceded his arrest may have involved the use of a cell-site simulator, more colloquially known by the trade name ‘stingray,’ and that this technology was used without a warrant. Ex. 1 to Pl.’s Opp’n ¶ 7. Mr. Woodward therefore made a FOIA request to the USMS in December 2015 seeking: 1 The material facts of this case are not in dispute. See Ex. 2 to Pl.’s Opp’n at 1 (“Plaintiff does not dispute the facts as …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals