Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Zavala v. Ives

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

May 18, 2015

DANIEL ALEJANDRO ZAVALA, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
RICHARD B. IVES, Warden, Respondent-Appellee

Argued and Submitted, Pasadena, California August 4, 2014

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. D.C. No. 2:13-cv-03603-JFW-E. John F. Walter, District Judge, Presiding.

SUMMARY [*]

Habeas Corpus

The panel reversed the district court's denial of federal prisoner Daniel Alejandro Zavala's 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas corpus petition claiming improper denial of sentencing credit, and remanded.

The panel held that when immigration officials detain an alien pending potential prosecution, the alien is entitled under 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b) to credit toward his criminal sentence; that an alien is entitled to credit for all time spent in Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency detention subsequent to his indictment or the filing of formal criminal charges against him; and that where a factual dispute exists, the district court must hold an evidentiary hearing as to whether an alien's detention by ICE prior to the date of his indictment or the filing of criminal charges against him constituted detention pending prosecution.

The panel held that the district court erred when it denied Zavala sentencing credit for the post-indictment period during which ICE detained him pending criminal prosecution. The panel remanded for the district court to determine in the first instance whether and when during the pre-indictment period Zavala's detention status changed from detention pending deportation to detention pending potential prosecution. The panel held that, on remand, the government has the burden of proving that the pre-indictment detention was for the purpose of deportation rather than potential prosecution.

Concurring in part and dissenting in part, Judge Callahan agreed with the majority that under § 3585(b) an alien is eligible for credit for all time spent in ICE custody from the day he or she is indicted or criminally charged. She dissented from the majority's broader interpretation of § 3585 - that an alien is entitled to credit toward his criminal sentence for the period during which ICE detained the alien pending potential criminal prosecution.

Ashfaq G. Chowdhury (argued), Deputy Federal Public Defender; Sean Kennedy, Federal Public Defender, Los Angeles, California, for Petitioner-Appellant.

Tritia L. Yuen (argued), Assistant United States Attorney; André Birotte, Jr., United States Attorney; Joseph B. Widman, Assistant United States Attorney, Chief, Riverside Branch Office, Riverside, California, for Respondent-Appellee.

Before: Stephen Reinhardt, Kim McLane Wardlaw, and Consuelo M. Callahan, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Judge Reinhardt; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge Callahan. CALLAHAN, Circuit Judge, concurring in part and dissenting in part.

OPINION

Page 368

REINHARDT, Circuit Judge:

Daniel Zavala seeks credit toward his criminal sentence under 18 U.S.C. ยง 3585(b), the sentencing credit statute, for ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.