United States v. Lutz
4:19-cr-00692
D. Ariz.Nov 12, 2019Background
- Francisco Munoz Lutz arrested Feb. 22, 2019; a magistrate judge ordered release on conditions on Feb. 27, 2019.
- Munoz missed multiple preliminary hearings while held by ICE; a preliminary hearing deadline under Fed. R. Crim. P. 5.1 expired on March 11, 2019.
- Indictment filed March 13, 2019; arraignment March 25, 2019; Munoz was removed to Mexico while the case was pending and defense counsel lost contact.
- Munoz moved to dismiss, alleging ICE’s detention/removal violated the Bail Reform Act and his Sixth Amendment right to counsel and requested dismissal with prejudice.
- Magistrate Judge Macdonald recommended granting dismissal with prejudice; the Government objected and the district court ordered supplemental briefing and heard argument.
- The district court adopted the R&R, found a Sixth Amendment violation caused by government actors, and dismissed the indictment with prejudice on Nov. 8, 2019.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ICE’s detention/removal may trump a court’s BRA release order | ICE/ Govt: INA detention authority can operate independently; no conflict with BRA | Munoz: BRA release cannot be nullified by ICE removal; BRA pretrial-release protections must be respected | Court: BRA protections control here under Ninth Circuit precedent; ICE removal impaired BRA purpose and missed hearings |
| Whether removal violated Sixth Amendment right to counsel | Govt: Removal did not foreclose counsel access; remote contact or travel to Mexico possible | Munoz: Removal deprived meaningful access to counsel, review of evidence, and defense preparation | Court: Removal interfered with Sixth Amendment rights; government conduct caused the interference |
| Appropriate remedy for government-caused interference | Govt: Dismissal with prejudice inappropriate absent flagrant prosecutorial misconduct; other remedies sufficient | Munoz: Dismissal with prejudice necessary to remedy violation and deter interagency noncooperation | Court: Dismissal with prejudice warranted under supervisory powers to remedy constitutional violation and deter future misconduct |
| Weight of post-Santos-Flores circuit decisions (Veloz-Alonso, Vasquez-Benitez, Nunez) | Govt: Later circuits cast doubt on Trujillo-Alvarez and support ICE detention despite BRA release | Munoz: Santos-Flores (9th Cir.) controls in this circuit and limits ICE’s ability to defeat BRA release | Court: Follows Ninth Circuit Santos-Flores; finds Veloz-Alonso unpersuasive and inconsistent with Ninth Circuit law |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Santos-Flores, 794 F.3d 1088 (9th Cir. 2015) (ICE removal cannot be used to trump Bail Reform Act release determinations)
- United States v. Trujillo-Alvarez, 900 F. Supp. 2d 1167 (D. Or. 2012) (90-day removal period interpretation; pretrial release counts as confinement for INA timing)
- United States v. Veloz-Alonso, 910 F.3d 266 (6th Cir. 2018) (ICE may detain pending removal despite BRA release determination)
- United States v. Vasquez-Benitez, 919 F.3d 546 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (INA and BRA serve different purposes; ICE authority to remove not negated by BRA)
- United States v. Nunez, 928 F.3d 240 (3d Cir. 2019) (INA permits detention for removal but not solely to secure appearance for prosecution)
- United States v. Barrera-Moreno, 951 F.2d 1089 (9th Cir. 1991) (courts may dismiss indictments under supervisory powers to protect judicial integrity and deter misconduct)
- United States v. Resendiz-Guevara, 145 F. Supp. 3d 1128 (M.D. Fla. 2015) (government must explain why it did not prevent ICE removal in light of DOJ/ICE regulations)
- United States v. Boutin, 269 F. Supp. 3d 24 (E.D.N.Y. 2017) (criticizing ICE removals that prejudice criminal prosecutions)
- United States v. Ailon-Ailon, 875 F.3d 1334 (10th Cir. 2017) (interagency conflicts are generally matters for the Executive Branch to resolve internally)