Brown v. Ahern
676 F.3d 899
9th Cir.2012Background
- Brown was arrested for robbery in California in March 2007 and faced consolidated charges with ongoing preliminary hearings.
- Brown sought dismissal in state courts claiming Speedy Trial violations; state courts denied.
- Brown filed a federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 requesting a permanent stay of state charges.
- The district court dismissed the petition, citing abstention under Carden and Younger, without addressing the merits.
- Brown appealed contending McNeely altered the abstention rule; the panel affirmed the district court.
- Panel reiterates the general abstention rule and its exceptions as applied to pre-conviction Speedy Trial claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether abstention bars pre-conviction Speedy Trial habeas review | Brown argues McNeely overruled Carden and allowed merits review | Ahern (state) asserts Carden abstention applies absent extraordinary circumstances | Abstention bars merits review unless extraordinary circumstances exist |
| Whether McNeely abrogated Cardén abstention rule | Brown contends McNeely altered circuit law | State maintains McNeely did not affect Carden | McNeely did not alter Carden abstention rule |
| Whether the district court properly abstained under Carden | Brown asserts error in abstaining pre-trial | District court correctly abstained under Younger/Carden | Confirmed district court properly abstained under Cardén rule |
| If exceptions exist, do they apply here | Brown claims harassment/irreparable injury warrant pre-trial relief | No extraordinary circumstances shown | No applicable extraordinary circumstances shown |
| What is the governing rule after Brown's appeal | Brown seeks merits review despite abstention | Abstention remains generally required; McNeely irrelevant to overrule | Affirmed abstention rule; McNeely does not override Cardén |
Key Cases Cited
- Carden v. Montana, 626 F.2d 82 (9th Cir.1980) (abstention precludes pre-conviction Speedy Trial habeas absent extraordinary circumstances)
- Perez v. Ledesma, 401 U.S. 82 (Supreme Court 1971) (limits extraordinary circumstances to harassment or irreparable injury)
- Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484 (Supreme Court 1973) (enforces state obligation via §2241; cautions against derailing pending state proceedings)
- McNeely v. Blanas, 336 F.3d 822 (9th Cir.2003) (pre-conviction Speedy Trial relief but not overruling Cardén abstention)
- Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (Supreme Court 1971) (abstention based on comity/federalism; extraordinary circumstances required)