Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Zermeno-Gomez

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

August 25, 2017

In re Rodrigo Zermeno-Gomez; Gustavo Hernandez-Gutierrez; Martin Rios-Arias,
v.
United States District Court for the District Of Arizona, Phoenix, Respondent, Rodrigo Zermeno-Gomez; Gustavo Hernandez-Gutierrez; Martin Rios-Arias, Petitioners, United States of America, Real Party in Interest.

          Submitted to Motions Panel August 15, 2017 San Francisco, California

         Petition for Writ of Mandamus, D.C. Nos. 2:17-mj-09200-ESW-1 2:17-cr-00803-DLR-1 2:15-cr-00280-SMM-1Edward C. Voss, Magistrate Judge, Presiding, Douglas L. Rayes, District Judge, Presiding, Stephen M. McNamee, District Judge, Presiding

          Daniel L. Kaplan, Assistant Federal Public Defender; Jon M. Sands, Federal Public Defender; Office of the Federal Public Defender, Phoenix, Arizona; for Petitioners.

          Krissa M. Lanham and Dominic W. Lanza, Assistant United States Attorneys; Elizabeth A. Strange, Acting United States Attorney; United States Attorney's Office, Phoenix, Arizona; for Real Party in Interest.

          Before: Alfred T. Goodwin, Alex Kozinski, and Marsha S. Berzon, Circuit Judges.

         SUMMARY[*]

         Mandamus

         The panel granted a petition for a writ of mandamus ordering the judges within the District of Arizona to comply with this court's decision in United States v. Sanchez-Gomez, 859 F.3d 649 (9th Cir. 2017) (en banc), which held that before placing a defendant in shackles, the district court must "make an individualized decision that a compelling government purpose would be served and that shackles are the least restrictive means for maintaining security and order."

         The petitioners are three defendants whose requests to be unshackled were denied based on the stayed mandate in Sanchez-Gomez.

         The panel held that the petitioners satisfied the requirements for mandamus relief set forth in Bauman v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 557 F.2d 650 (9th Cir. 1977). The panel explained that whether a published decision of this court is binding on lower courts within the circuit, notwithstanding a stay of the mandate, is plainly an issue of major importance to the administration of the district courts. The panel held that petitioners have demonstrated that the judges within the District of Arizona who found that Sanchez-Gomez was not binding on them committed clear error, as this court has unequivocally stated that a published decision constitutes binding authority and must be followed unless and until it is overruled by a body competent to do so. The panel explained that the remaining Bauman factors also weigh in favor of granting relief.

          ORDER

         On May 31, 2017, this court held in United States v. Sanchez-Gomez, 859 F.3d 649, 661 (9th Cir. 2017) (en banc) that before placing a defendant in shackles, the district court must "make an individualized decision that a compelling government purpose would be served and that shackles are the least restrictive means for maintaining security and order." About two weeks later, this court granted the government's motion to stay the mandate, so the government could seek full en banc review or file a petition for a writ of certiorari.

         Citing the stay of the mandate, several judges within the District of Arizona found that Sanchez-Gomez was not binding on them and accordingly denied defendants' requests to be unshackled. A court-established committee tasked with providing a recommendation on how to comply with Sanchez-Gomez likewise concluded that no action was required until the mandate issued.

         The petitioners in this case are three defendants whose requests to be unshackled were denied based on the stayed mandate in Sanchez-Gomez. On June 26, 2017, petitioners filed this petition for a writ of mandamus asking that we order the District Court for the District of Arizona to comply with our decision in Sanchez-Gomez. That same date, petitioners also filed an emergency motion for injunctive relief, which the government opposed.

         We granted petitioners' emergency motion on July 14, 2017, stating, "Pending further order of the court, respondent United States District Court for the District of Arizona is ordered to comply with our decision in United States v. Sanchez-Gomez, 859 F.3d 649 (9th Cir. 2017) (en banc)." Three weeks later, the Chief Judge for the District of Arizona issued a memorandum establishing a district-wide procedure for determining, prior to a defendant's appearance in court, whether and how the defendant should ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.