Eastern District of California Blog

EDCA Court Rules Negligence By Government In Boy's Lassen Park Death

A Sacramento federal judge ruled Tuesday that the federal government negligently caused the death of a 9-year-old boy in July 2009 at Lassen Volcanic National Park.

U.S. District Judge Troy L. Nunley issued the ruling to penalize the government for the deliberate destruction by National Park Service officials of evidence that is critical in a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the boy's family against the United States.

Nunley's ruling adopts findings and recommendations made almost two months ago by U.S. Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows.

The magistrate judge rebuked Lassen park Superintendent Darlene M. Koontz for the destruction of evidence and for lying in a sworn deposition about an investigator's attempt to interview her.

Sacramento Bee, 5/15/13

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/05/15/5421052/judge-rules-negligence-by-government.html#storylink=cpy

Mother/Daughter Mortgage Fraud Defendants Released on $750,000 Bail & Home Detention

Over the government's objection, Judge Hollows ordered the Manteca mother-daughter pair arrested on mortgage fraud charges Sunday released to home detention with electronic monitoring and a $750,000 bail secured by three properties.  Sac Bee.   

Mandatory DNA Collection for Pretrial Releasees Now in the Ninth

The Federal Defender's appeal of Judge Garcia's order rejecting constitutional challenges to the law mandating DNA collection from defendants on pretrial release has now been scheduled for briefing and argument in the Ninth.  In U.S. v. Pool,  No. 09-10303, the opening brief is due October 5 and oral argument has been set for the week of December 7-11 in San Francisco.  Judge Garcia's order, EJG U.S. v. Pool Order 7-15-09, summarily adopted Judge Hollows's conclusion in rejecting the FD's challenges to mandatory DNA collection for pretrial releasees before conviction, see May 30, 2009 post and order.  According to Rachelle Barbour who is handling the FD's appeal, Judge Hollows agreed to continue to stay DNA collection pending her client's appeal to the Ninth, but that he intends to lift the stay for other similarly situated defendants unless they appeal too.  Others who want to contest the DNA collection order should continue to challenge any DNA collection condition in the magistrate court, appeal adverse orders to the respective district court judges (and the Ninth Circuit if necessary), and request stays pending appeal.  Call Rachelle if you want the briefing in Pool or to discuss consolidating an appeal with her Pool appeal in the Ninth.   

Judge Hollows Upholds Mandatory DNA Testing For Federal Arrestees--No Conviction Required

In what the U.S. Attorney's Office is calling a case of first impression, U.S. Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows rejected constitutional challenges and upheld the mandatory collection of DNA samples for all those arrested upon probable cause for any federal felony.  U.S. v. Pool DNA order available here.  The Federal Defender's Office has announced they will appeal to U.S. District Judge Edward J. Garcia and have applied for a stay of the DNA condition of pretrial release.  Attorneys representing other defendants should strongly consider objecting to any pretrial DNA collection condition and should ask that any such order be stayed pending final decision in the Pool case.  Contact Rachelle Barbour at the FD's office for briefing.

If the government can force the collection of mandatory DNA from presumptively innocent persons, are we not close to the point when everyone's DNA will be in a National database?  NYT, "FBI and States Vastly Expand DNA Databases".  I guess this is all supposed to be ok because we should just trust the government?  Just like we are supposed to have trusted that the government would not overstep the bounds of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in not warrantlessly wiretapping U.S. citizens?  NYT, "Officials Say U.S. Wiretaps Exceeded Law"  And if DNA testing helps protect the innocent from being wrongly convicted, how come prosecutors object to defense efforts to obtain DNA to exonerate potentially innocent inmates?