Free Response in Opposition - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cr-03160-DMS

Document 34

Filed 05/12/2008

Page 1 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

KAREN P. HEWITT United States Attorney CHRISTINA M. McCALL Assistant U.S. Attorney California State Bar No. 234139 Office of the U.S. Attorney 940 Front Street, Room 5152 San Diego, California 92101-8800 Telephone: (619) 557-6760 [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 MIGUEL ROSAS-LEON, 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I INTRODUCTION The United States of America, by and through its counsel, Assistant United States Attorney Christina M. McCall, on behalf of the Metropolitan Correctional Center, San Diego, California (MCC San Diego), and the United States Marshals Service (USMS), hereby submits its response and opposition to defendant's motion to be transferred back to MCC San Diego. Miguel Rosas-Leon, Register Number 17098-198, is a pretrial inmate currently confined at a private downtown facility owned and operated by the GEO Group under contract with the USMS. Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Criminal Case No. 07CR3160-DMS

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR MISCELLANEOUS RELIEF Hearing Date: May 16, 2008 Hearing Time: 11:00 a.m.

Case 3:07-cr-03160-DMS

Document 34

Filed 05/12/2008

Page 2 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Previously, he was confined at MCC San Diego.

He was transferred

from MCC San Diego to GEO after the institution learned the inmate was engaging in inappropriate conduct, including abusing his law library privileges. See Baird Decl. (Exhibit 1), ¶ 4.

Arrangements had been made at MCC San Diego for Rosas-Leon to have greater access to the inmate law library, however, he abused that privilege by attempting to pass contraband in the library as explained in the attached declaration by Associate Warden (AW) Maureen P. Baird. Id. As a result, on April 25, 2008, Rosas-Leon Id.

was transferred from MCC San Diego to GEO.

As Ms. Baird's declaration explains, Rosas-Leon was caught abusing his law library privileges and was Id. becoming overly

familiar with staff and the institution. concern was the inmate's increasingly

Of particular attitude and

cavalier

staff's failure to discipline Rosas-Leon's obvious misconduct. Id. at ¶ 5-6. As a result, MCC San Diego does not want RosasId. at ¶ 9.

Leon to return to that facility. II

ARGUMENT A. Inmates Have No Right to Be Housed In a Particular Prison Ordinarily, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) may transfer an inmate from one prison to another, at any time and for any reason, and the inmate is not entitled to notice or a hearing concerning the movement. 18 U.S.C. § 4082(b); Grayson v. Rison, 945 F.2d

1064, 1067 (9th Cir. 1991);

Ward v. United States Parole Comm'n, Inmates have no right to be

804 F.2d 64, 65 (7th Cir. 1986).

2

Case 3:07-cr-03160-DMS

Document 34

Filed 05/12/2008

Page 3 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

housed in a particular institution. 236 (1978).

Montayne v. Haymes, 427 U.S.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court has made clear that, in evaluating detention conditions, the federal courts must not substitute their judgment for that of jail officials: "In

determining whether restrictions or conditions are reasonably related to the Government's interest in maintaining security and order and operating the institution in a manageable fashion, courts must heed our warning that such considerations are

peculiarly within the province and professional expertise of corrections officials, and, in the absence of substantial evidence in the record to indicate that the officials have exaggerated their response to these considerations, courts ordinarily should defer to their expert judgment in such matters." Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, n.23 (1979)(emphasis added). See also Mauro v.

Arpaio, 188 F.3d 1054, 1058 (9th Cir. 1999) (en banc) ("Running a prison is an inordinately difficult undertaking that requires expertise, planning, and the commitment of resources, all of which are peculiarly within the province of the legislative and

executive branches of government."). As outlined in AW Baird's declaration, Mr. Rosas-Leon engaged in a pattern of behavior that included an open disregard of the institution's rules and regulations. His conduct was not only

egregious but if he were to be permitted to return he would likely openly flaunt his self-perceived power within the facility. There is no evidence that officials at the MCC exaggerated their

response to the issues that Rosas-Leon created. 3

The Bureau of

Case 3:07-cr-03160-DMS

Document 34

Filed 05/12/2008

Page 4 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Prisons has reasonably exercised its professional expertise in this situation by deciding to transfer Rosas-Leon; this Court should defer to its expert judgment. B. Law Library Access Cannot Form the Basis of a Transfer Order Rosas-Leon's motion asserts that the inmate law library at GEO is inadequate, even though he had never used it when the motion was filed. There is no constitutional requirement that an In Kane v.

inmate have absolute access to a prison law library.

Espitia, 546 U.S. 9 (2005), the Supreme Court clarified that Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975) did not clearly

establish an inmate's law library access right, and neither did any other Supreme Court or appellate case. In Espitia, the

Supreme Court held that the Ninth Circuit case that Defendant cites, Bribiesca v. Galaza, 215 F.3d 1015 (9th Cir. 2000),

"therefore erred in holding, based on Faretta, that a violation of a law library access right is a basis for federal habeas relief." 546 U.S. at 13. In addition, in Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343 (1996), the Supreme Court found that Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817 (1977), "did not create an abstract, freestanding right to a law library or legal assistance"; rather, "the right that Bounds acknowledged was the right of access to the courts." 430 U.S. at 350-51.

Lewis also clarified that "an inmate alleging a violation of Bounds must show actual injury" to have standing to allege a deprivation of right to access the courts. Id. at 349.

In order to make a "right of access to the courts claim" based on inadequate access to the law library, an inmate must 4

Case 3:07-cr-03160-DMS

Document 34

Filed 05/12/2008

Page 5 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

establish two things: (1) that access was so limited as to be unreasonable; and (2) the inadequate access caused actual injury. Vandelft v. Moses, 31 F.3d 794, 797 (9th Cir. 1994). makes neither claim. Officials may reasonably regulate the time, place, and manner in which the inmate library is used. See Isaac v. Jones, 529 Rosas-Leon

F.Supp. 175, 178-179, (N.D. Illinois 1981), citing Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 830 (1977) and Knell v. Bensinger, 489 F.2d 1014, 1017 (7th Cir. 1973). The Western Regional Detention Facility at San Diego ("GEO") warden wrote a letter (attached as Exhibit 2) outlining RosasLeon's arrival at the facility and access to the law library. The

GEO warden indicates that GEO's law library contains recent editions of the Supreme Court Reporter, United States Code, Federal Supplement, and West's Federal Digest on computer. warden's letter summarizes GEO's operational procedures The for

library use and indicates that Rosas-Leon spent many hours in the GEO law library on May 6 and May 7, 2008. Additionally, Mr. Rosas-Leon can enlist his stand-by counsel to supplement his legal research. The record in this case

demonstrates that Federal Defenders, Rosas-Leon's standby counsel, have filed multiple motions on his behalf, including this motion for miscellaneous relief. Rosas-Leon has ample resources to

prepare for his trial and guarantee his access to the court system: (1) the GEO law library; (2) dozens of hours already spent in the MCC library; and (3) the two veteran attorneys from Federal Defenders who serve as his standby counsel. 5

Case 3:07-cr-03160-DMS

Document 34

Filed 05/12/2008

Page 6 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

III CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the United States of America on behalf of the Metropolitan Correctional Center in San Diego and the United States Marshals Service, submits that this Motion for Miscellaneous Relief be denied. DATED: May 12, 2008 KAREN P. HEWITT United States Attorney /s/ Christina M. McCall

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6 CHRISTINA M. McCALL Assistant U.S. Attorney