United States v. Rangel, 318 F. Supp. 3d 1212

Defendant Efren Suarez Rangel, a Mexican national present in the U.S. without authorization, was indicted on two counts of distributing 50+ grams of methamphetamine (statutory mandatory minima apply).
Magistrate Judge Dimke held Rangel eligible for pretrial release under the Bail Reform Act (BRA) and set bond with special conditions; ICE was notified of the release conditions.
After release on bond, ICE took Rangel into immigration custody pursuant to a detainer and transported him to Tacoma; he missed a March 1 pretrial conference because of ICE detention and the district court issued a warrant.
Upon Rangel’s reappearance, the USAO moved for pretrial detention; the district court held hearings to decide BRA eligibility and the conflict between criminal-process release and ICE custody.
The court found Rangel’s ties to the community, employment, lack of violent/criminal history, and low flight risk supported pretrial release despite a rebuttable presumption of detention based on the charges.
The court concluded ICE custody pending removal while criminal proceedings are ongoing violates the BRA, and, because no lesser remedy would cure the violation in light of Speedy Trial constraints, dismissed the indictment without prejudice and ordered Rangel released.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Rangel is entitled to pretrial release under the Bail Reform Act	USAO: Rebuttable presumption of detention applies due to serious drug charges; magistrate’s release should be set aside	Rangel: Presented ties, employment, lack of criminal history to rebut presumption and show conditions can assure appearance and safety	Court: Agrees with magistrate—balance of §3142(g) factors favors release; BRA presumption weighed but USAO failed to meet burden of persuasion
Whether ICE may detain a criminal defendant in immigration custody pending trial when BRA grants pretrial release	USAO: ICE intends to reassume custody for removal; such custody permitted	Rangel: ICE custody to detain pending trial conflicts with BRA and prevents court-ordered pretrial release	Court: BRA controls; §3142(d) permits only temporary detention for deportation decision within 10 days; Executive must elect removal or defer; ICE cannot detain to circumvent BRA release
Appropriate remedy for ICE’s ongoing detention that thwarts BRA rights	USAO: Proposed writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum or coordination between agencies	Rangel: Dismissal required because alternative remedies won’t cure constitutional/statutory violation and speedy-trial timing	Court: Dismissal without prejudice is the only effective remedy given Speedy Trial deadlines and lack of cooperation from ICE; indictment dismissed and defendant released

Hir v. Dep’t of Justice, 517 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir.) (presumption under §3142(e) shifts production burden but government retains persuasion burden)
United States v. Motamedi, 767 F.2d 1403 (9th Cir.) (weight of the evidence is the least important §3142(g) factor)
United States v. Santos-Flores, 794 F.3d 1088 (9th Cir.) (questions about pretrial release resolved in defendant’s favor; only rare cases should deny release)
United States v. Trujillo-Alvarez, 900 F.Supp.2d 1167 (D. Or.) (administrative immigration detention cannot substitute for BRA-authorized release)
United States v. Resendiz-Guevara, 145 F.Supp.3d 1128 (M.D. Fla.) (holding pretrial immigration detention violated BRA rights)
United States v. Barrera-Moreno, 951 F.2d 1089 (9th Cir.) (dismissal appropriate when prosecutorial process violates statutory or constitutional rights and no lesser remedy exists)
United States v. Hastings, 461 U.S. 499 (U.S.) (recognition of courts’ supervisory powers to remedy violations and preserve judicial integrity)
Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (U.S.) (statutory interpretation tools include section titles and headings)
United States v. W.R. Grace, 526 F.3d 499 (9th Cir.) (discussing scope of court’s supervisory powers)