Tellez Velazquez v. Hon. myers/state, 1 CA-SA 17-0298

Abel Tellez Velazquez was arrested on state charges (aggravated assault and resisting arrest) and released on his own recognizance on August 20, 2017.
On the same day ICE took Velazquez into federal custody for removal proceedings; he was later held at Eloy Detention Center.
The state court issued a habeas corpus ad prosequendum writ directing ICE to produce Velazquez and ordering him to remain in Maricopa County Sheriff custody "until all further proceedings are completed."
The immigration court authorized Velazquez’s release on a $45,000 federal bond, and Velazquez presented a cashier’s check but had not posted the bond.
Velazquez moved in superior court to modify the writ (release to ICE custody so he could post bond or be released on recognizance); the superior court denied the motion, and Velazquez sought special action relief.
The superior court scheduled sentencing under a plea agreement; the appellate court accepted jurisdiction but denied relief, holding the state did not abuse its discretion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the superior court abused its discretion by refusing to modify the writ to allow release to ICE so Velazquez could post federal bond	Velazquez argued he should be released (on recognizance, third-party custody, or bond) to post the federal bond; continued state custody violated due process and equal protection and was unnecessary because he posed low flight risk	State argued the writ kept Velazquez in custody "until all further proceedings are completed" and that the federal government retained primary jurisdiction; the State therefore could not release him absent federal authorization	Court held no abuse of discretion: the federal government had primary jurisdiction after state ROR; the writ only lent custody to the State ("on loan"), so State could not release him until federal conditions were met

Ponzi v. Fessenden, 258 U.S. 254 (1922) (federalism/comity principle that the sovereign first assuming control may exhaust its remedy before the other proceeds)
Thomas v. Brewer, 923 F.2d 1361 (9th Cir. 1991) (first sovereign to arrest has priority of jurisdiction)
Setser v. United States, 566 U.S. 231 (2012) (each sovereign is responsible for its own criminal justice administration; priority principles apply)
Taylor v. Reno, 164 F.3d 440 (9th Cir. 1998) (transfer pursuant to a writ ad prosequendum leaves primary custody with the sending sovereign)
Caruso v. Superior Court, 100 Ariz. 167 (1966) (standard of review for abuse of discretion in common-law writs)