Author: Federal Public Defender, CDCA

What happens when I am arrested for a federal crime?

Posted on June 8, 2017

Soon after your arrest, agents will bring you to court before a magistrate judge. The charges against you will be contained in a complaint with an affidavit that summarizes the evidence against you, or in an indictment returned by a grand jury. The magistrate judge will explain your rights and make sure that you understand what the prosecutor claims you did.  If you cannot afford an attorney, you will fill out a financial form (signed under penalty of perjury) to show that you cannot afford […]..

I have a federal warrant in the Central District of California or another district. What should I do?

Posted on June 8, 2017

If you know that you have an outstanding federal warrant, you should immediately surrender to the United States Marshal in any district. If you are located within the Central District, call the Federal Public Defender’s Office at (213) 894-2854. A Deputy Federal Public Defender can arrange your surrender to the United States Marshal.  Choosing not to surrender can result in adverse consequences to your case and even additional criminal charges...

I was arrested in the Central District of California, but my case originates in Ohio (or some other federal district). How will I get to that other district?

Posted on June 8, 2017

If you are in custody, it is the Marshal’s duty to transfer you to the charging jurisdiction. If you are out on bond, you must travel to the originating jurisdiction yourself.  There is a statute — 18 U.S.C. section 4285 — which the magistrate judge can use to order the marshal to pay for your transportation; however, the marshals typically only pay for one-way travel. You should discuss this with your attorney...

Categorical Approach Update

Posted on May 26, 2017

United States v. Aguirra, __ Fed.Appx. __, 2017 WL 2258554, *3 (9th Cir. May 23, 2017): The Court concluded that Becerril-Lopez (holding that a conviction under California Penal Code §211 is categorically a crime of violence for purposes of U.S.S.G. §2L1.2) is not clearly irreconcilable with Mathis or Descamps, so it has not been effectively overruled. United States v. Martinez-Rodriguez, __ F.3d __, 2017 WL 2080268 (5th Cir. May 12, 2017): The Court held that a Texas conviction for causing injury to a child (Tex. […]..

10 CASA Participants Graduate from Program

Posted on May 10, 2017

Today, a graduation ceremony was held at the California Central District’s United States Courthouse in Los Angeles for 10 people who successfully completed the Conviction and Sentence Alternatives (CASA) Program. The event was held in the ceremonial courtroom and presided over by the Hon. Dolly Gee, U.S. District Court Judge, Hon. Paul Abrams, U.S. Magistrate Judge, and Hon. Virginia Phillips, Chief U.S. District Judge. Friends and family attended the graduation ceremony. Staff from the Federal Public Defender’s Office for the Central District of California attended […]..

Categorical Approach Update

Posted on May 5, 2017

United States v. Rivera-Muniz, __ F.3d __, 2017 WL 1404193 (9th Cir. Apr. 20, 2017): The Court held that a California manslaughter conviction (Cal. Penal Code §192(a)) is categorically a crime of violence (namely, generic manslaughter) for purposes of U.S.S.G. §2L1.2. United States v. Barker, __ Fed.Appx. __, 2017 WL 1433330 (9th Cir. Apr. 24, 2017), and United States v. Andrews, __ Fed.Appx. __, 2017 WL 1433316 (9th Cir. Apr. 24, 2017): The Court rejected vagueness challenges to U.S.S.G. §4B1.2’s residual clause in light of […]..

Categorical Approach Update

Posted on April 14, 2017

United States v. Arriaga-Pinon, __ F.3d __, Case No. 16-50188 (9th Cir. Apr. 7, 2017): The Court held that, under the modified categorical approach, the defendant’s conviction under California Vehicle Code §10851(a) (theft and unlawful driving or taking of a vehicle) was not an aggravated felony. The Court therefore did not have to reach the defendant’s argument that its 2013 decision in Duenas-Alvarez holding that §10851(a) is divisible is clearly irreconcilable with Mathis. Concurring, Judge Thomas noted that, because Mathis has altered the legal landscape, […]..

Former Deputy Federal Public Defender Ingrid Eagly Receives 2017 UCLA Distinguished Teaching Award

Posted on March 13, 2017

UCLA School of Law Professor (and former Deputy Federal Public Defender for the Central District of California) Ingrid Eagly has been honored with UCLA’s Distinguished Teaching Award, the highest honor for academic instruction at the university. Eagly, the faculty director of UCLA Law’s David J. Epstein Program in Public Interest Law and Policy, is one of six professors to receive the honor in 2017. The Distinguished Teaching Award was first granted in 1961. It aims to inspire students and faculty by shining a light on […]..

Categorical Approach Update

Posted on March 10, 2017

Beckles v. United States, __ S.Ct. __, 2017 WL 855781 (Mar. 6, 2017): The Supreme Court held that the Sentencing Guidelines in general—and the residual clause of the career-offender guideline in particular—are not subject to vagueness challenges under the Due Process Clause. United States v. Jenkins, __ F.3d __, 2017 WL 727154 (7th Cir. Feb. 24, 2017): The Court held that kidnapping under 18 U.S.C. §1201(a) is not a crime of violence for purposes of 18 U.S.C. §924(c) because it does not have as an […]..

Categorical Approach Update

Posted on February 10, 2017

United States v. Steiner, __ F.3d __, 2017 WL 437657 (3d Cir. Feb. 1, 2017): The Court held that Pennsylvania burglary (18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. §3502(A)) is categorically not a crime of violence for purposes of U.S.S.G. §2K2.1 / §4B1.2. United States v. Driver, __ F.3d __, 2017 WL 382307 (11th Cir. Jan. 27, 2017): The Court held that Florida’s false-imprisonment statute (Fla. Stat. Ann. §787.02)—which defines the crime as “forcibly, by threat, or secretly confining, abducting, imprisoning, or restraining another person without lawful […]..