Eastern District of California Blog

Pope Francis Calls For Abolishing Death Penalty And Life Imprisonment

The National Catholic Reporter reports Pope Francis's call for the abolition of the death penalty and life imprisonment:

Pope Francis called for abolition of the death penalty as well as life imprisonment, and denounced what he called a "penal populism" that promises to solve society's problems by punishing crime instead of pursuing social justice.

"It is impossible to imagine that states today cannot make use of another means than capital punishment to defend peoples' lives from an unjust aggressor," the pope said Thursday in a meeting with representatives of the International Association of Penal Law.

"All Christians and people of good will are thus called today to struggle not only for abolition of the death penalty, whether it be legal or illegal and in all its forms, but also to improve prison conditions, out of respect for the human dignity of persons deprived of their liberty. And this, I connect with life imprisonment," he said. "Life imprisonment is a hidden death penalty."

EDCA Court Rules Lawsuit Over Vallejo Police Shooting Can Proceed

Grieving parents can pursue claims that police officers shot to death their naked, unarmed son during a hallucinogen-fueled rampage with another man, a federal judge ruled.

Vallejo police Officer Sean Kenney and other officers allegedly killed 29-year-old Jeremiah Moore shortly after 1:30 a.m. on Oct. 21, 2012.

His parents, Lisa and Eugene Moore, say it all started when police responded to complaints that Jeremiah and his partner, Jason Jessie, "were arguing, breaking windows in their house and their parked cars, and trying to set their house on fire," Courthouse News reported two days after the fatal shooting.

Responding officers allegedly found Jeremiah Moore walking around naked and unarmed. The Moores claim the police were told that Jeremiah had autism and was mentally ill, but when he did not immediately respond to their orders to get on the ground, they opened fire.

The Vallejo Police Department issued a statement the day of the shooting, claiming that Moore had pointed a loaded rifle at an officer, and that another officer shot him to save the other officer's life.

A local newspaper reported that police found the decapitated bodies of three pet birds in Moore's back yard, and later reports indicated that the men had been under the influence of a substance identified as "bath salts."

Moore's parents filed a pro per lawsuit in April 2014 against the city of Vallejo, Police Chief Joseph Kreins, and Officer Sean Kenney, citing seven causes of action, including wrongful death and civil rights violations.

U.S. District Judge John A. Mendez sided with the Moores on all but two claims in an 11-page ruling issued Friday, Oct. 17.

He rejected the defendants' argument that the Moores did not include enough evidence in their First, Fourth and 14th Amendment claims against Officer Kenney.

The Moores' complaint stated that Kenney shot and killed their son while Jeremiah was naked and unarmed, and despite knowing that he was mentally ill, which sufficiently entitles them to relief, Judge Mendez wrote.

But Mendez agreed to dismiss the Moores' interference with familial relationship claim, saying they had improperly pleaded it under the Fourth Amendment.

* * *

He also dismissed the Moores' claims of unreasonable search and seizure and excessive, but said that their other claims against Kenney still stand.

Arguments that the Moores did not allege sufficient facts to support civil rights claims against Vallejo and Chief Kreins did not impress the court.

Courthouse News Service, 10/21/14

Schweder Case Marijuana Evidentiary Hearing Starts Friday, 1:30 P.M.

At the request of the parties due to a scheduling conflict, the start of the evidentiary hearing on the constitutionality of classifying marijuana as a schedule I controlled substance in U.S. v. Schweder, et. al., No. 2:11-CR-0449-KJM, has been advanced to Friday, at 1:30 p.m. for the limited purpose of hearing the testimony of defense witness, Gregory T. Carter, M.D.  He will be testifying via video.  The evidentiary hearing is expected to continue on Monday, October 27, 9:00 a.m.-4:30 p.m., October 28, 9:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m., and, if necessary, October 29, 1:30-4:30 p.m.  It's in Judge Mueller's courtroom on the 15th Floor of the Sacramento federal courthouse.

California Prisons Settle EDCA Lawsuit Over Race-Based Lockdowns As Punishment

Yesterday's LA Times reports on this settlement of an EDCA lawsuit challenging the California prison's use of race-based lockdowns as punishment:

When a group of prisoners attacked two guards at California's High Desert State Prison in 2006, the warden declared a full lockdown that confined African Americans in one wing of the prison to their cells, and kept them there for 14 months.

No outdoor exercise. No rehabilitation programs or prison jobs.

This week, California agreed to give up its unique use of race-based punishment as a tool to control violence in its crowded prisons. Corrections chief Jeffrey Beard and lawyers for inmates have settled a six-year-long civil rights lawsuit, filed in 2008, over the High Desert lockdown.

The case was eventually widened to cover all prisoners and lockdown practices that had become common statewide. The agreement now goes to a federal judge for expected approval.

"We see this as a tremendous result," said Rebekah Evenson, a staff lawyer at the Prison Law Office, which pressed the class-action litigation.

* * *

The U.S. Justice Department had joined sides with inmates' lawyers in the case, intervening a year ago and stating that California's racial lockdowns were inconsistent with federal practices, ineffective and based on "generalized fears of racial violence."

U.S. District Judge Troy L. Nunley made it clear he considered the state's defense thin. In awarding prisoners class-action status in July, Nunley said it was "undisputed" that California had statewide lockdown policies based on race.

Chief Judge Orders Recusal Of All EDCA Court Judges From Moonlight Fire Civil Case

In this Order, Chief Judge England has ordered the recusal of all EDCA district judges in the moonlight fire civil case. See my 10/10/14 monlight fire post.

EDCA Assistant U.S. Attorneys Win Award For Work On JP Morgan Settlement

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder bestowed the Award for Distinguished Service – the department’s second-highest honor for employee performance – on Assistant U.S. Attorneys David Shelledy, chief of the Sacramento office’s civil division, and Kelli Taylor and Colleen Kennedy, who work in the civil division; as well as Richard Elias, former assistant U.S. attorney in the civil division who is now in private practice in St. Louis.

The four were cited for their work, under the guidance of Shelledy and U.S. Attorney Benjamin Wagner, “that led to an unprecedented civil settlement with JPMorgan Chase,” the nation’s largest bank.

“The settlement negotiations and the (underlying) fraud investigations they undertook led to what was the largest settlement with a single entity in American history – $13 billion – and the largest … penalty ever recovered by the department – $2 billion” under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989. The measure was enacted in response to the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s.

The settlement resulted in part from an investigation showing that, in the lead-up to the 2007-08 collapse of the economy, JPMorgan sold billions of dollars of residential mortgage-backed securities which included loans that did not comply with underwriting guidelines, were secured by properties with inflated appraisals, were supported by inaccurate loan-to-value or debt-to-income ratios or were otherwise unlawfully originated, according to the citation.

All the while, the citation says, JPMorgan was “misrepresenting to investors the (high) quality of the loans … and the (low) risk of loss.” The efforts of the four award recipients held “wrongdoers accountable for reckless and abusive conduct that contributed to the financial crisis,” the citation says.

Wagner said Wednesday the four attorneys “exemplify what it truly means to be a public servant.”

Sacramento Bee, 10/15/14

Ninth Circuit Issues En Banc Decision In Fresno Civil Rights Action Involving Officers Handcuffing 11-Year Old Student

In C.B. v. City of Sonora, No. 11-17454, the Ninth Circuit en banc today affirmed in part and reversed in part the EDCA Court's judgment following a jury trial in an action arising out of a decision by Sonora City police officers to handcuff and remove from school grounds an 11-year old child with attention-deficit and hyperactivity disorder who was sitting on a bench and refused to leave the playground.

At least that's what the summary says of the 83-page opinion with multiple concurrence and partial dissents.

Atheist Ordered To Participate In Religious-Based Drug Treatment Program Wins $2 Million Settlement

A Shasta County atheist whose parole agent required him to participate in a religious-oriented drug treatment program has settled his lawsuit against the state and a rehabilitation contractor for nearly $2 million.

Barry A. Hazle Jr. did a year in prison on a narcotics conviction. His release on parole was revoked – and he was sent back to prison for more than three months – after he complained about mandated attendance at a drug treatment program where acknowledgment of a higher power is required.

Hazle, 46, sued officials of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation six years ago in Sacramento federal court. Six weeks later, the department issued a directive that parole agents may not compel a parolee to take part in religious-themed programs. A parolee who objects should be referred to nonreligious treatment, the directive said, citing federal case law.

* * *

U.S. District Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr. found that compelling Hazle to attend the program ran “afoul of the prohibition against the state’s favoring religion in general over nonreligion,” and violated a constitutional right against government imposing religious beliefs on him.

But when the case went to trial on the issue of money, the jury refused to award damages for Hazle’s loss of freedom and emotional distress.

In August 2013, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals threw the jury’s verdict out, ruling that Hazle must be compensated for the violation of his constitutional right.

The three-judge circuit panel sent the case back to Burrell for a new trial and directed the judge to instruct the jury that Hazle is entitled to damages.

Sacramento Bee, 10/14/14

EDCA Court Hearing Today On Chukchansi Casino Reopening

Officials with the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians will learn Wednesday [1:30 p.m., Fresno Federal Courthouse, Judge O'Neill's Courtroom, 7th Floor] whether the tribe’s Coarsegold casino will reopen sooner or later when a judge hears from state and federal lawyers who ordered it closed.

On Tuesday, regulators were in the 1,800-slot, 42-table Chukchansi Gold Resort & Casino along with a skeleton crew of about 100 employees.

The state Attorney General’s office and the National Indian Gaming Commission closed the casino to customers Friday after a fight between two tribal factions forced 500 patrons to leave the casino and hotel Thursday night — some with money on the table and chips to cash in. The closure occurred after members of a tribal faction led by Tex McDonald, which has control of the nearby tribal business complex, forcibly entered the casino and began fighting with security guards loyal to the Reggie Lewis/Nancy Ayala faction. Seven weeks ago, members of the Lewis/Ayala group seized the casino from McDonald’s faction.

Judge Lawrence J. O’Neill, who issued the temporary restraining order on Friday to close the casino and hotel because he believed the health and safety of patrons could not be protected, will decide how to proceed.

Fresno Bee, 10/14/14.

EDCA Court Issues Significant CERCLA Ruling

A federal court ruling out of California could inject a new line of litigation in the already contentious world of cleaning up with country’s most contaminated sites.

The ruling by Judge William Shubb of the Eastern District of California holds that state government agencies can be targeted as potentially responsible for the cost of cleaning up contaminated sites under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (aka Superfund).

Law blogs are abuzz trying to decipher the potential ramifications of the ruling, which seems to suggest that regulators could bear some responsibility for cleaning up the messes left by generations of industrial users.

Portland Business Journal