United States v. Peeples
630 F.3d 1136
9th Cir.2010Background
- Peeples indicted for knowingly receiving child pornography, alleged to involve December 2007 to February 2010 and about 5,000 files.
- At arraignment, Peeples released pending trial with Walsh Act conditions including curfew and electronic monitoring.
- Peeples moved to declare Walsh Act conditions unconstitutional; magistrate denied, district court denied appeal, Peeples appeals.
- Walsh Act amended Bail Reform Act to require electronic monitoring, curfew, restrictions, no contact with victims or potential witnesses.
- Peeples challenges mandatory release provisions as to Excessive Bail, Due Process/presumption, and separation of powers.
- Court affirms district court, holding Walsh Act permits individualized determinations and does not violate constitutional rights.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Facial challenge viability to Walsh Act | Peeples argues curfew/electronic monitoring unconstitutional in all cases. | Walsh Act can be constitutionally applied with individualized determinations. | Facial challenge fails; some defendants may require monitoring. |
| As-applied challenge to Peeples' release conditions | Constitutional rights violated due to lack of individualized determination for Peeples. | Statute requires discretion; conditions tailored to Peeples' circumstances. | As-applied challenge fails; individualized determinations permitted. |
| Constitutional doctrine and statutory construction | Walsh Act undermines fundamental rights and separation of powers. | Statutory construction avoids constitutional doubts; court should adopt permissible reading. | Court adopts construction avoiding grave constitutional questions; upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987) (facial challenge to preventive detention statutes)
- Stephens, 594 F.3d 1033 (8th Cir. 2010) (Walsh Act constitutional under tailored conditions)
- Gardner, 523 F. Supp. 2d 1025 (N.D. Cal. 2007) (district court upheld Walsh Act as applied)
- Jones v. United States, 526 U.S. 227 (1999) (statutory interpretation to avoid constitutional questions)
- St. Martin Evangelical Lutheran Church v. South Dakota, 451 U.S. 772 (1981) (statutory construction to avoid constitutional questions)