Opinion
Case No. 20030274-CA.
Filed October 17, 2003. (Not For Official Publication)
Appeal from the Third District, Salt Lake Department, The Honorable J. Dennis Frederick.
David Reddish, Draper, Appellant Pro Se.
Before Judges Jackson, Bench, and Orme.
Appellant David Reddish seeks to appeal the denial of his motion for discovery. This case is before the court on a sua sponte motion for summary disposition.
On December 26, 2002, Reddish filed a motion for discovery seeking an order compelling the Board of Pardons to produce the blue package of evidence considered in a parole rehearing held in November of 2000 that Reddish claims resulted in a December 5, 2000 decision. The district court denied the motion because there was no pending case before it to support a discovery request. The record confirms that Reddish did not file a petition under rule 65B of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure seeking review of the procedures utilized by the Board in the rehearing.See Padilla v. Board of Pardons, 947 P.2d 664, 671 (Utah 1997) (holding judicial review of decision is limited to process by which the Board undertakes its functions and court cannot review merits of decision). The motion was limited to discovering the evidence considered by the Board and cannot be construed as a rule 65B petition. In addition, in his response to the sua sponte motion, Reddish included a copy of a letter from the Board stating that Reddish acknowledged receipt of the blue packet in advance of the rehearing and declining to provide a duplicate of the packet.
The district court correctly denied the motion for discovery and dismissed the action because there was no pending case in which the request for discovery could be pursued. Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal.
Norman H. Jackson, Presiding Judge, Russell W. Bench, Judge, and Gregory K. Orme, Judge.