United States of America v. State of California et al
Filing
83
NOTICE of FILING CORRECTED 74 DECLARATION by Defendants. (Attachments: # 1 Supplemental Declaration of Cherokee Melton, # 2 Amended Declaration of Cherokee Melton )(Melton, Cherokee) Modified on 5/21/2018 (Benson, A.).
EXHIBIT A
Page 1
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
4
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, :
Plaintiff,
5
vs.
:
: No. 18-264
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA;
6
:
EDMUND GERALD BROWN, JR.,
:
Governor of California, in his:
7
Official Capacity; AND XAVIER :
BECERRA, Attorney General of
California, in his Official
:
Capacity,
8
:
:
9
Defendants.
:
10
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
11
VIDEOTAPED
12
DEPOSITION OF: THOMAS HOMAN
13
DATE:
Tuesday, April 10, 2018
14
TIME:
10:12 a.m.
15
LOCATION:
Department of Justice
16
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
17
Washington, D.C.
18
REPORTED BY:
19
Denise M. Brunet, RPR
Reporter/Notary
20
21
22
23
24
25
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 2
1
A P P E A R A N C E S
2
3
On behalf of the Plaintiff:
4
COLIN A. KISOR, ESQUIRE
5
EREZ REUVENI, ESQUIRE
6
LAUREN BINGHAM, ESQUIRE
7
U.S. Department of Justice
8
Civil Division
9
450 5th Street, Northwest
10
Washington, D.C.
20530
11
(202) 532-4331
12
colin.kisor@usdoj.gov
13
14
On behalf of the Defendants:
15
CHRISTINE CHUANG, ESQUIRE
16
State of California
17
Department of Justice
18
Bureau of Children's Justice
19
1515 Clay Street
20
Suite 2100
21
Oakland, California
22
(510) 879-0094
23
christine.chuang.doj.ca.gov
94612
24
25
(Appearances continued on the next page.)
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 3
1
APPEARANCES (continued):
2
3
On behalf of the Defendants (continued):
4
LEE I. SHERMAN, ESQUIRE
5
CHEROKEE DM MELTON, ESQUIRE
6
SATOSHI YANAI, ESQUIRE
7
State of California
8
Department of Justice
9
300 S. Spring Street
10
Suite 1702
11
Los Angeles, California
12
(213) 269-6404
13
lee.sherman@doj.ca.gov
90013
14
15
ALSO PRESENT:
Rene E. Browne
16
Michael P. Davis
17
Michael F. Arnold
18
Moria Skinner
19
Julie Laughlin
20
Dan Reidy, Videographer
21
22
23
24
25
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 36
1
were accurate and up to date.
2
I'm -- certainly, you know, would say the numbers
3
are different today, as of today, because people
4
have been arrested since I've signed this.
5
Q
Thank you.
I don't know --
In fiscal year 2018, has ICE
6
increased its immigration enforcement operations
7
in California?
8
9
A
We have increased our enforcement
footprint in California.
10
Q
In what specific ways?
11
A
I have sent more officers and agents to
12
the State of California to do the same job we used
13
to do with less officers and agents.
14
Q
Besides sending more agents, are there
15
other ways in which ICE has increased its
16
immigration enforcement activities in California?
17
A
Again, the prioritization has changed.
18
The aperture of those who fall within a priority
19
has increased.
20
as per the executive order.
21
collateral arrests because we can't work in a
22
jail, which means we have to go to a neighborhood
23
where we'll find collaterals.
There are more
That's probably the biggest changes.
24
25
So there are more fugitive arrests
Q
212-279-9424
Do you attribute the increase to [sic]
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 37
1
immigration enforcement activities in California
2
to SB 54?
3
A
I contribute [sic] the increase in
4
non-criminal alien arrests and the increase in
5
collateral arrests to SB 54, yes.
6
7
8
9
Q
And can you please explain why you
attribute it to SB 54?
A
Because when we used to have offices
inside the jail, one officer could sit in the
10
county jail and process 10, 12 aliens a day.
11
that jail chooses to release those people, I have
12
to send a fug-ops team, which is usually staffed
13
by five or six officers, to locate that person.
14
When
So one officer used to process 10 to 12
15
aliens a day.
16
fug-ops team to go find one person.
17
required me to send more resources to the State of
18
California to do the same job we used to do with
19
less.
20
the jail.
21
Now I've got to send an entire
So that has
We lost the efficiency of working inside
So that's had a direct impact on our
22
operations, not only costing more money for the
23
government to send more additional officers out
24
there to support at large operations, it also puts
25
my officers at great risk.
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 38
1
Q
You just stated that it costs more money
2
for the government to send additional agents.
3
you have an estimate of how much more money it
4
costs?
5
A
I don't know the figure offhand.
Do
We --
6
we did operations recently in southern California
7
and in northern California.
8
operations this -- in the past several months in
9
California.
We did three
We had to send many detail agents to
10
augment existing staff to do these operations.
11
I'm certain we track those expenses.
12
off the top of my head.
13
them.
14
Q
15
16
I don't know
We certainly can provide
Do you attribute the increase in ICE
enforcement activities in California to AB 450?
A
I think AB 450 is requiring us to work
17
harder and less efficient than prior to the
18
enactment of 450.
19
Q
20
that?
21
A
Can you please describe why you believe
Well, a couple of things.
We just did an
22
I-9 operation in California, and I recently
23
learned that, for instance, one company in San
24
Francisco did not want to supply the I-9 forms per
25
the notice of inspection.
212-279-9424
It was the delay in
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 39
1
giving us the I-9 forms until the company -- the
2
company felt like they would be in violation of
3
450, so they got an attorney.
4
administrative subpoena to get the documents.
5
That caused more work.
6
We had to do an
There seemed to be confusion on what the
7
employer thought between 450 versus what the
8
federal requirements are.
So we spent more time
9
in working that one case.
That's one I was
10
briefed on specifically.
11
Q
What company are you referring to?
12
A
I don't have that number offhand.
13
Q
The name offhand?
14
A
I don't know it offhand.
15
Q
Okay.
16
17
When did this I-9 operation
relating to this company occur?
A
Within the past eight weeks.
I don't
18
know the exact dates.
19
inspection throughout the country.
20
was -- I think we've already completed the first
21
phase in California.
22
Q
We have a rolling I-9
California
So several weeks ago.
And did the company specifically inform
23
you that they did not want to comply with the I-9
24
inspection process?
25
A
212-279-9424
The information I received from HSI
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 40
1
leadership was that the company would not --
2
didn't think they had to comply with the notice of
3
inspections to give the I-9s within the three days
4
required.
5
violation of 450.
6
They thought they were going to be in
They contacted an attorney.
We actually
7
did an administrative subpoena, and we got the
8
I-9s after additional work.
9
relayed to me.
That is what was
10
Q
Who relayed that to you?
11
A
Derek Benner, the acting executive
12
associate director for Homeland Security
13
investigations.
14
Q
And who relayed that to Derek?
15
A
The e-mail was -- first, Derek verbally
16
told me that he followed up with an e-mail.
17
e-mail was from Derek.
18
don't know who -- I'm sure the e-mail split up
19
between -- we have three SACs, special agents in
20
charge:
21
was -- I'm sure he got it from the SACs, but I do
22
not know for sure because I did not ask him that
23
question.
24
Q
25
The
And their staff below -- I
San Francisco, L.A. and San Diego.
So it
Do you know if Derek obtained that
information directly from the company?
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 42
1
A
It has to be submitted and requested
2
through HSI leadership in the field office.
3
don't know if that's -- at what level that is.
4
mean, back when I was an agent, it was the head of
5
that office, which would be the ADDI.
6
sure what the approval level is now for an
7
administrative subpoena.
8
the staff to request an administrative subpoena,
9
draw the administrative subpoena up and have
10
11
So I
I
I'm not
But it requires work by
someone approve it, sign it, then serve it.
Q
In this situation in which you had to
12
obtain an administrative subpoena, how long after
13
the initial request for the I-9 inspection did you
14
obtain the subpoena?
15
A
I do not know.
16
Q
Do you have enough information to give a
17
good faith estimate of how long?
18
A
No.
19
Q
Do you know whether it was within one
20
week of the initial request for the I-9
21
inspection?
22
A
No.
I don't recall what the e-mail said
23
other than there's a delay.
24
time frame in the e-mail or he said it verbally, I
25
don't recall.
212-279-9424
So I -- if there's a
But I just -- during the I-9
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 43
1
process, the operations, knowing the difficulties
2
with the legislation, I asked for information on
3
how the operation was going.
4
issue that I remember being briefed on.
5
have a time frame.
6
Q
This was just one
I do not
So after you served the administrative
7
subpoena, were you able to obtain the documents
8
that you needed for your inspection?
9
A
That is my understanding.
10
Q
Besides this one company that we are just
11
talking about, do you know of any other incidents
12
about employers being confused about what they are
13
or are not allowed to do during an I-9 inspection?
14
A
Not specifically other than what I read,
15
of course, the numerous media reports about
16
employers being confused.
17
Q
What media reports are you referring to?
18
A
News stories.
I read news clips every
19
morning when I come to work, and there was a lot
20
of news stories about our worksite operations in
21
California and how some employers seem to be
22
confused on complying with federal law or the
23
state law.
24
25
Q
Do you recall any specific employers
referenced in these news clips that you reviewed?
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 44
1
A
No.
2
Q
Besides this one company in San Francisco
3
that we talked about, since the passage of AB 450,
4
have any employers informed ICE that they are
5
confused about what they are or are not allowed to
6
provide during the I-9 inspection?
7
A
Not that I'm aware of.
8
Q
Since the passage of AB 450, have any
9
employers informed ICE that they are confused
10
about what documents may or may not be provided
11
without a warrant?
12
13
A
Can I go back to the previous question?
I just remembered something.
14
Q
Yes.
15
A
On that case in San Francisco, there was
16
another issue.
17
subpoena to get the I-9s because they didn't seem
18
like they could give them voluntarily, notice of
19
inspection, because of 450.
20
We went and got an administrative
Also, the company notified our agent that
21
they were withdrawing from the IMAGE program
22
because they thought that was in violation.
23
they were, my understanding, part of the ICE IMAGE
24
program, and now no longer because of the
25
legislation.
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
So
212-490-3430
Page 53
1
your answer was wrong.
2
A
It's correct.
3
Q
Okay.
Do you know whether AB 450
4
prohibits the service of additional documents
5
during a form I-9 inspection?
6
A
I do not know.
7
Q
Since the passage of AB 450, are you
8
aware of any instances in California where HSI was
9
denied the ability to serve additional notices on
10
an employer?
11
A
I'm not aware of any.
12
Q
Since the passage of AB 450, are you
13
aware of any instances in California in which an
14
employer did not comply with providing additional
15
notices that were served during an I-9 inspection?
16
17
18
A
Additional notices beyond the notice of
inspection?
Q
Yes.
So additional notices, as
19
referenced in your declaration, includes a notice
20
of technical procedural failures, notice of
21
discrepancies, notice of suspect documents,
22
warning notice and a notice of intent to fine.
23
A
I'm not aware of any.
24
Q
If you go to the middle of the paragraph
25
of paragraph 85, the sentence that begins with,
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 54
1
"This prohibition could impede HSI from obtaining
2
valuable evidence (for example, statements from
3
business owners, employees and/or human resources
4
managers)" -- do you see that sentence?
5
A
Yes.
6
Q
Since the passage of AB 450, are you
7
aware of any instances where HSI has been impeded
8
from obtaining valuable evidence that could have
9
been used in the prosecution of an employer?
10
A
Could you repeat the question again?
11
Q
Yes.
Since the passage of AB 450, are
12
you aware of any instances where HSI has been
13
impeded from obtaining valuable evidence that
14
could have been used in the prosecution of an
15
employer?
16
A
17
18
I'm not aware of any, but we certainly
wouldn't know what we don't know.
Q
The next sentence states, "This
19
prohibition may also prevent HSI from obtaining
20
sufficient determination -- sufficient information
21
to determine the existing -- existence of
22
aggravating or mitigating factors."
23
Do you see that sentence?
24
A
Yes.
25
Q
Have any such incidents occurred?
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 55
1
A
Not that I'm aware of.
2
Q
Let's turn --
3
A
I think the reason why this affidavit is
4
worded the way it is is based on our experience of
5
what happens during worksite operations, that this
6
is certainly an issue that we're concerned about
7
from past experience.
8
9
As I discussed before, doing a lot of
this work in a public area will tend to -- people
10
won't be freely discussing issues that would be
11
very important to criminal investigations or
12
protecting victims of trafficking or peonage.
13
all of -- well, I don't know of any specific
14
incident that may have happened in California yet.
15
I think the possibility is very strong that it
16
will impede what we're trying to do.
17
Q
So
And you believe that possibility is very
18
strong based on your experience as a law
19
enforcement official; is that correct?
20
A
Yes.
21
Q
Is there any other basis for your belief?
22
A
Just my belief, along with other law
23
enforcement officers I've talked to that do this
24
type of work.
25
within law enforcement as a profession that we
212-279-9424
I think there's an understanding
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 57
1
Are those individuals within ICE?
2
A
Yes.
3
Q
Have you spoken with any law enforcement
4
agencies or officers in California about AB 450
5
and the impact?
6
A
No.
I spoke to Derek Benner.
I told you
7
he relayed his findings from the offices in
8
California, but I have not specifically talked to
9
any agent in the State of California.
10
11
Q
Let's turn to paragraph 86.
Let me know
when you've had a chance to review.
12
A
Okay.
13
Q
Do you know of any incidents since AB 450
14
went into effect where an employer's inability to
15
consent to federal immigration officials entering
16
the premises impeded an investigation?
17
A
No.
Other than the one case in San
18
Francisco where they did not hand over -- they
19
felt like they couldn't comply with the notice of
20
inspection.
21
I don't have any information -- any examples of
22
that.
23
Q
But as far as entering the premises,
At the end of the paragraph, you mention
24
human smuggling and trafficking, and you've
25
mentioned that a few times today as well, as some
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 58
1
of your potential concerns.
2
incidents since AB 450 went into effect that has
3
caused detriment to ICE's enforcement efforts in
4
human smuggling and trafficking efforts?
5
A
Do you know of any
I don't have any specific examples, but
6
again, we don't know what we don't know, because
7
we haven't had private meetings with
8
employers/employees.
That's my concern.
9
Q
Let's turn to paragraph 87, please.
10
A
Okay.
11
Q
Are you aware of any incidents since
12
AB 450 went into effect where an employer's
13
failure to permit entry to federal immigration
14
officials led to the disclosure of an employee's
15
personal information?
16
A
No.
17
Q
Please turn to paragraph 88.
How has
18
AB 450 adversely affected ICE's worksite
19
enforcement investigations?
20
A
Other than the incident that we spoke of
21
in San Francisco, I think this paragraph talks
22
about what AB 450 will do to our operations and
23
what risk it will cause.
24
25
Q
In the fourth line down, you state that,
"This could lead to a violent confrontation."
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 59
1
Do you see that sentence?
2
A
Yes.
3
Q
Are you aware of any violent
4
confrontations which have occurred as a result of
5
AB 450?
6
A
No.
7
Q
Let's turn to paragraph 60, please.
8
A
You said 60?
9
Q
60, 6-0.
This particular paragraph
10
relates to AB 103.
11
inspections pursuant to that section has caused
12
the facilities to expend resources and presents a
13
burdensome intrusion into facility operations and
14
pulls scarce resources away.
15
And you discuss that the
Can you please describe, in as much
16
detail as you can, the nature of burdensome
17
intrusion into facility operations?
18
A
It has been briefed to me that -- and
19
based on my experience, when you do a facility
20
inspection, it requires people to be present to
21
host the inspection.
22
many documents.
23
the facility.
24
other work are pulled from that work to gather
25
documents, prepare for the inspections, host the
212-279-9424
It requires a gathering of
It requires clearances to come in
People that would normally be doing
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 60
1
inspections, do follow-ups for the inspections.
2
We don't have a separate staff that does
3
nothing but prepare for inspections.
They've got
4
to be pulled from other duties, whether it's guard
5
duty, you know, management duties, you know,
6
whatever.
7
facilities to have yet, you know, another
8
inspection that's going to require them to expend
9
resources and spend time and energy preparing for
It just causes an undue burden on
10
and responding to and providing for the
11
inspection.
12
Q
Have any specific facilities stated to
13
you or ICE that this is a burdensome intrusion
14
into their operations?
15
A
I did not speak to the facilities.
I was
16
briefed by my staff and detention management
17
staff.
18
believe Tae Johnson, who runs the detention
19
management division at headquarters, provided the
20
information that the facilities were complaining
21
about the burdensome extra work in pulling
22
resources to do this work from other critical
23
areas.
24
25
Q
In the -- gathering the affidavit, I
Do you know what facilities complained to
Tae Johnson?
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 61
1
A
No, I do not.
2
Q
When you were briefed by the staff and
3
detention management staff, did they provide you
4
details of which facilities complained to them?
5
A
I do not recall.
In the supporting
6
documentation I reviewed, I think there was some
7
documentations talking about specific facilities,
8
if I recall correctly, but, again, this was -- I
9
was briefed by my staff who was briefed by the
10
detention staff.
11
personally with Tae Johnson.
12
supporting documentation there was some
13
documentation that talked about the facilities,
14
but I don't specifically recall what facilities.
15
Q
I did not have discussions
But I believe in the
When you refer to supporting
16
documentation, are you referring to e-mail
17
communications?
18
A
I believe they're e-mails.
19
Q
Are there any other type of --
20
A
I don't recall.
21
Q
-- communications?
22
A
I don't recall.
23
Q
When were you --
24
A
Tae Johnson is a senior executive in my
25
staff, an SES.
212-279-9424
He's been doing detention
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 67
1
dearly, and that's information that, if it became
2
exposed to someone coming in doing an audit, that
3
would be a violation of federal law.
4
even give that information to members of Congress.
5
So there's -- that's very serious.
6
We don't
And that's another -- besides the privacy
7
issue, we have certain statutes that protect
8
information from [sic] certain category of aliens.
9
And that's another concern about these
10
11
inspections.
Q
Do you know of any DHS or ICE privacy
12
policies that have been violated as a result of
13
AB 103?
14
A
No.
15
Q
I'm going to refer back to -- I believe
16
this is Exhibit 3.
It's the February 20th, 2017
17
enforcement memo.
18
page 5 of that memorandum, section G.
19
discusses aligning the department's privacy
20
policies with the law.
If you could please turn to
And that
21
A
Okay.
22
Q
So the first sentence states that, "The
23
department will no longer afford Privacy Act
24
rights and protections to persons who are neither
25
U.S. citizens nor lawful permanent residents."
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 68
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Did you implement this change of policy
for ICE?
A
It's my understanding it's still being
worked on.
Q
And when it's still being worked on, do
you mean it's in draft form?
A
It's the privacy office -- last I was
8
briefed on this, the policy office is working on
9
changes of the privacy policy.
10
Q
Do you have an estimated time frame for
11
the completion and approval of the new privacy
12
policy?
13
A
No.
14
Q
So those -- in your understanding of this
15
policy change, does it impact privacy protections
16
for lawful permanent residents?
17
A
There's privacy protection for everybody
18
in our custody.
But there's a -- I think there's
19
an elevated concern for those who are lawful
20
permanent residents.
21
the victims of domestic abuse, trafficking, not
22
only do they have privacy protection, they
23
actually have statutory protections.
And of course, again, for
24
But again, I know what this says, but I
25
can tell you that I'm not a policy expert, but a
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 70
1
memorandum to impact privacy protections for
2
individuals who are not U.S. citizens or who are
3
not lawful permanent residents?
4
5
6
A
That's what it says.
But again, I think
that the policy itself is still being worked on.
Q
Okay.
Do you have an understanding of
7
what privacy rights still exist for individuals
8
who are not U.S. citizens or not lawful permanent
9
residents?
10
A
No, I do not.
That's why I have a
11
privacy shop and that's why I have the office of
12
principal legal advisor to advise me what we can
13
and can't do as far as release of privacy
14
information.
15
Q
Do you know of any public disclosures of
16
any information about detainees that have resulted
17
from the AB 103 inspections?
18
A
I'm not aware of any.
19
Q
So let's turn to paragraph 65 of your
20
declaration.
21
1367 regarding information relating to individuals
22
who are applicants or beneficiaries of immigration
23
benefits under the Violence Against Women Act or a
24
T or U visa.
25
this before on your last answer.
212-279-9424
So this discusses 8 U.S.C. section
I believe you generally mentioned
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 73
1
2
that have been deterred as a result of AB 103?
A
I believe there are some facilities in
3
the State of California we weren't able to do a
4
new contract with or expand the contract because
5
of that law.
6
Q
Which facilities are you talking about?
7
A
I believe it's -- in paragraph 53, it
8
says, "ICE's efforts to expand its detention
9
capacity in Sutter, Solano, Placer, Shasta, Fresno
10
Stanislaus and San Mateo counties have been
11
completely frustrated by the enactment of AB 103."
12
13
14
Q
Do you understand that the -- whether
these facilities are county facilities?
A
I'm sure they're IGSAs.
I don't know if
15
they're county or -- they're serving property --
16
IGSA is intergovernment service agreements, but I
17
don't know if they're counties or not.
18
know.
19
Q
I don't
Do you know of any specific private
20
contractors that have been deterred from working
21
with ICE as a result of AB 103?
22
A
I can tell you that our two biggest
23
contractors, CoreCivic and Geo, G-E-O, are
24
concerned that this law will cause great hardship
25
for them and require resources being pulled off
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 74
1
critical mission things to, again, do these
2
inspections that we think are unnecessary.
3
4
Q
How many facilities in California does
CoreCivic operate?
5
A
I do not know.
6
Q
Do you know if they operate any in
7
California?
8
A
I do not know.
9
Q
How many facilities in California does
10
11
Geo operate?
A
I know they have the Adelanto facility,
12
which is a big facility.
13
that.
14
Q
15
But I don't know beyond
So besides Adelanto, you don't know what
other facilities in California Geo operates?
16
A
No.
17
Q
Do you know if there are any others?
18
A
I do not know.
19
Q
When did CoreCivic relay these concerns
20
21
to you or ICE?
A
CoreCivic, I don't recall.
It was a
22
general conversation with them about legislation.
23
I don't even know if it was specific to
24
California, about the way the California
25
legislation, if it would expand beyond -212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 75
1
elsewhere, what their concerns are.
2
3
Geo was specific to California.
A couple
of months ago in a conversation.
4
Q
Did you participate in the conversation?
5
A
One of them, yes.
6
Q
How many conversations were there?
7
A
Just one.
8
Q
And please discuss the substance of that
9
10
conversation.
A
It's just the difficulty in complying
11
with the laws.
12
require yet another inspection that we think is
13
unnecessary, because these are federal contracts,
14
these are federal prisoners detained under federal
15
authority.
16
certainly don't believe there should be any
17
inspections to talk about due process of people
18
that are in federal custody, under federal
19
authority, conditions of confinement when we have
20
our own set of standards which is much higher than
21
most states.
22
As I said before, it's going to
We have our own set of standards.
We
So there's this general feeling that this
23
is -- it's burdensome, that they're going to be
24
required to pull resources to do these
25
inspections, when we have numerous inspections
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 76
1
already at these facilities from various different
2
components.
3
So again, it's -- it's talk of
4
burdensomeness -- right? -- extra work, pulling
5
people from their duties to host these things and
6
gather documents and paperwork and making people
7
available for interviews and so forth.
8
9
10
Q
In that conversation, did Geo express any
concerns about the Adelanto facility specifically?
A
No.
It was a general conversation about
11
the legislation, how it's going to impact
12
operations.
13
14
Q
Okay.
And when you say legislation, you
mean AB 103?
15
A
Right.
16
Q
Was there any discussion --
17
A
Yes.
18
Q
-- about other legislation?
19
A
Not that I can recall.
20
Q
Did you discuss anything else in that
21
22
conversation?
A
I'm certain we did.
It was a meeting to
23
discuss -- we have meetings with our contractors
24
all the time.
That was brought up during one of
25
the meetings.
So I'm certain -- I'm sure -- I
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 77
1
can't remember, but when we have these meetings,
2
we talk about various contracts, various proposals
3
issues with facilities.
4
subject we talked during the meeting.
And this is just one
5
Q
Was this in person?
6
A
In person, in my building.
7
Q
Has Geo terminated its contract with ICE
8
relating to federal detention facilities?
9
A
No.
10
Q
You had mentioned the general
11
conversations that you may have had with
12
CoreCivic.
13
conversations?
14
15
A
No.
Were you directly involved with those
These conversations were relayed to
me through my staff.
16
Q
And when you say staff, who do you mean?
17
A
I believe it was Tae Johnson and Matt
18
Albence.
19
Q
And what did they relay to you?
20
A
It was a conversation about the whole
21
AB 103 and the predicament it puts us in about --
22
with our contractors; you know, yet another
23
inspection on top of the ones we already do, how
24
burdensome it is, and we certainly don't agree
25
that California should be doing it because of all
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 98
1
this form, is that encompassed in --
2
A
That's when we --
3
Q
-- that section that I --
4
A
That's when we transfer an alien to
5
another law enforcement agency at their request
6
for criminal investigative purposes or prosecution
7
purposes.
8
Q
9
10
11
So if number 2 on this form is checked
off, is that the item that would be checked off if
ICE was requesting a transfer back to ICE?
A
This is regarding -- when we have someone
12
in custody and we transfer them out of our custody
13
to another LEA --
14
Q
Right.
15
A
-- saying, when you're done with them,
16
we'd like them back.
17
Q
Right.
18
A
That's where this falls into play.
19
Q
Okay.
Great.
So when ICE makes a
20
detainer notification or transfer request, ICE
21
would use this form, correct?
22
A
Yes.
23
Q
So in paragraph 39 when you talk about
24
the increase in detainers not being honored, do
25
you refer to both the request to detain, notify
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 99
1
ICE and to transfer individuals to ICE upon
2
completion of their time in custody?
3
A
I think it basically is for them to
4
detain somebody for our attention.
That's the
5
majority of it.
6
intention was to clearly focus on them detaining
7
an alien for us.
It could include both.
8
Q
9
then?
10
A
That's my focus, yes.
11
Q
Okay.
But my
So that's your focus in this paragraph,
How does ICE know that there's
12
been an increase in detainers not being honored
13
since January 2018?
14
A
We track it in various ways.
If the
15
PERC, the Pacific Enforcement Response Center,
16
sent the detainer and we are notified they will
17
not honor the detainer, so they proactively tell
18
us they're not going to honor it, then we lift the
19
detainer in our database so it was a detainer
20
lift.
21
Many times if a law enforcement
22
jurisdiction does not honor detainers and don't
23
have a relationship with us, we won't know if they
24
honor the detainer or if they release somebody
25
until we -- he is re-apprehended, either by a
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 100
1
local police department or ourselves.
2
So it depends on the relationship with
3
the LEA.
4
sometimes they we at least notify us they're not
5
going to honor it.
6
anything.
Sometimes it's captured in the
7
database.
Sometimes it's not.
8
ways we find out about detainers not being
9
honored.
10
There's different relationships.
So
Sometimes they won't tell us
So it's various
Certainly if we dropped a detainer on
11
somebody and -- today, and three days later he's
12
rearrested by a law enforcement agency someplace
13
or arrested by us someplace, the detainer wasn't
14
honored.
15
say, I'm not honoring your detainer.
16
released him, didn't honor it.
17
through the rearrest.
18
Q
19
A
They just
We find out
rearrest?
20
But the law enforcement agency didn't
And how would you find out through the
Because when we rearrest him and enter
21
him in the database, the database is going to show
22
we've had him before, we dropped the detainer for
23
and it will show previous actions for the agency.
24
25
Q
So if the person has been rearrested, you
would know, and you also mentioned that if the LEA
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 101
1
tells you that they're not honoring the detainer,
2
you would know.
3
would know?
4
A
Is there any other way that you
It would either be communication from the
5
LEA or we would get information through a
6
rearrest.
7
from a third party that the person was released.
8
9
10
Q
It's always possible we could find out
And then when you find that information
out, then how does ICE track that information?
A
Of we -- once we verify the detainer
11
hasn't been honored and he's no longer in custody,
12
then we'll add to that an active case to go look
13
for him.
14
Q
And where is that information stored?
15
A
It would be in the -- I believe it's in
16
the EARM database.
17
in that database.
18
the number of detainers we know weren't honored --
19
they would have a record of.
20
exact number, because we really don't know, and
21
jurisdictions have zero relationship with us.
22
won't find out they didn't honor -- if they don't
23
honor detainers, somebody who doesn't get
24
rearrested, we may not know for a long time.
25
that data is not as accurate as I wish it would
212-279-9424
I'm not 100 percent sure it's
I know we track it.
We track
Again, it's not an
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
We
So
212-490-3430
Page 102
1
be, but we do the best we can with the data we
2
have.
3
Q
4
And when you track it in -- you said
EARM, correct?
5
A
Yeah.
6
Q
When you track it, do you also track if
7
the jurisdiction did not honor the request to --
8
request to notify ICE or the request to transfer
9
an individual in their custody to ICE?
10
A
It should be.
11
Q
Is that tracked separately from the
12
request to detain?
13
A
I do not know.
14
Q
Do you know how many detainers have been
15
issued to California law enforcement agencies in
16
FY 2018?
17
A
It's somewheres in here.
I've got to
18
find it.
19
California alone, ICE issued over 35,000
20
detainers.
21
Q
I thought we said about -- in 2017, in
That's in paragraph 18.
While we're talking about that number, do
22
you know, out of those 35,000, how many were not
23
complied with?
24
25
A
I'm sure we have a number that we're
aware of weren't complied with, that we have data
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 103
1
on.
Again, we track that, so --
2
Q
Right.
3
A
But I don't know, sitting here today,
4
5
what that number is.
Q
But we would be able to -- or I should
6
say you would be able to identify, looking at
7
EARM, how many detainers that California law
8
enforcement agencies did not comply with in 2017?
9
A
I think we -- I think we could tell you
10
how many detainers were not honored because the
11
law enforcement agencies notifies them or not.
12
can also add the number of aliens that were
13
rearrested, so obviously the detainer wasn't
14
honored.
15
We
As I said before, I think from a --
16
different data mines I think we can tell you what
17
we know.
18
Q
So before signing your declaration, were
19
you able to determine that there's been an
20
increase in detainers that have been -- that are
21
not being complied with for FY 2018?
22
23
A
The detainers -- more detainers are being
declined after the enactment of SB 54 --
24
Q
Right.
25
A
-- according to the staff that briefs me.
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 104
1
2
3
Q
Do you know how they got that
information?
A
I'm sure they got it from the database
4
and through speaking with the field office
5
directors in San Francisco, Los Angeles and San
6
Diego.
7
Q
And do you know by how much has there
8
been an increase in declined detainers since
9
SB 54?
10
A
I do not have that information today.
11
But I think in my affidavit we cited several
12
examples of egregious cases.
13
14
Q
Sure.
And we will -- yeah, we will get
to that.
15
And when a jurisdiction complies with
16
either a detainer notification or transfer
17
request, is that somewhere -- marked somewhere in
18
ICE's databases?
19
A
Yes.
20
Q
Where is that marked?
21
A
Pardon me?
22
Q
Where would the fact that a jurisdiction
23
24
25
complied with a detainer request be marked?
A
I believe it would be in EARM.
If -- if
not only there -- again, I think it's in EARM.
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
I
212-490-3430
Page 120
1
detainer notification and transfer request on it,
2
correct?
3
4
5
A
I know it as -- I know it as immigration
detainer, notice of action.
Q
Okay.
So is -- so does -- how many
6
I-247s have been issued to San Diego since SB 54
7
went into effect?
8
A
I don't have that figure with me.
9
Q
And do you know if any have been honored?
10
A
I do not know.
The list I was supplied
11
with had at least 119, and many since then.
12
mean, the list I saw as part of my book clearly
13
listed 119.
14
the data was pulled, but it had, first, the 119.
15
So I don't have the exact number with me.
16
17
Q
I
Then it had others because of the way
But do you know whether there have been
any that have been honored?
18
A
I don't know for sure.
19
Q
And in the -- your declaration you
20
identify that some of the individuals had criminal
21
charges pending.
22
the -- any of this 119 figure had been previously
23
convicted of a criminal offense?
24
25
A
Do you know whether any of
Based on my experience, many of these
criminals are recidivists.
212-279-9424
So certainly, based on
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 121
1
my 34 years, many of these people had prior
2
criminal convictions.
3
as 50 percent within the first year, 75 percent
4
within three to five years.
5
aliens we arrest have numerous criminal
6
convictions, but to speak specifically to the 119,
7
how many had previous convictions, I don't have
8
that information.
9
10
11
Q
Recidivism rate is as high
Many of the criminal
Would that be information that ICE would
have access to?
A
If we knew who he was and we ran it
12
through NCIC, it would show previous convictions
13
that were recorded, yes.
14
Q
And to what you were just saying about
15
recidivism, what is your basis for saying that a
16
lot of these individuals would be -- would have --
17
be at risk of recidivism?
18
I've been doing this for 34 years.
I've
19
arrested many criminal aliens in my career.
I've
20
seen numerous reports.
21
in front of Congress on data we pulled together to
22
show the risk of those who commit crimes in the
23
United States that are here illegally.
24
them are recidivist criminals.
25
A
Q
212-279-9424
I've testified many times
Many of
So -Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 122
1
A
I think when we do at large operations,
2
what we call safe neighborhoods, safe streets, and
3
we target criminal aliens to be arrested, many of
4
those targets have numerous prior criminal
5
convictions.
6
seen -- I've been a part of operations for many
7
years.
8
based on information that I've seen or been
9
supplied to me, many of the targets of operations
10
11
12
So I've seen data sheets.
I've
So not only based on my experience, but
have multiple criminal convictions.
Q
So I would like to point your attention
now to paragraph 43.
13
A
Yes.
14
Q
Is there anything that is not in this
15
paragraph that you would use to support your basis
16
for thinking that criminal aliens have a risk of
17
recidivism?
18
A
Well, these are numbers that were
19
supplied to me by my senior leadership concerning
20
California.
21
just -- which I didn't think was necessary -- it's
22
my personal experience, my 34 years of what I
23
know, based on my enforcing immigration law for so
24
many years, that many criminal aliens have prior
25
criminal history.
212-279-9424
The only thing I would add to this is
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 145
1
officers on the ground that are making these
2
decisions, they think it's impossible.
3
4
5
6
7
8
Q
So...
Since January 4th, 2018, how many SPBPs
have been denied in California?
A
I don't think I have that with me.
I
don't think I have a number with me.
Q
Do you know how many have been
authorized?
9
A
No.
10
Q
Do you know if there's been any that have
11
been authorized other than the one incident you
12
referred to in paragraph 78?
13
A
I do not.
14
Q
So going to paragraph 78, you say, "In
15
light of the recent enactment of SB 54, ICE must
16
weigh the benefit of a potentially successful
17
prosecution with the very likely risk that the
18
relevant California law enforcement agencies
19
cannot, due to SB 54, notify ICE of an impending
20
release or transfer the [sic] alien to ICE custody
21
for removal upon completion of criminal
22
proceedings."
23
Is -- is this something -- is ICE
24
weighing the benefit something that's new because
25
of SB 54?
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 154
1
Q
And again, just talking about the
2
criminal offenses, is that standard practice that
3
ICE would seek a judicial warrant if there is a
4
criminal immigration offense?
5
A
Generally.
I mean, there's -- there's,
6
as you know, many ways you can do it.
You can go
7
through a -- you know, to the U.S. Attorney's
8
Office, you can do an affidavit, and you can go
9
through the whole indictment procedure through the
10
grand jury.
There's various ways to do a case.
11
But, yeah, we -- we get judicial warrants for
12
criminal cases as part of our SOP, for criminal
13
prosecutions.
14
Q
Are there operational --
15
A
Criminal arrests.
16
Q
Are there operational difficulties in
17
obtaining a warrant for a criminal immigration
18
offense?
19
A
We do it every day.
I mean, it's work,
20
but we do it every day.
21
up a magistrate and -- but it's something we do as
22
part of our job.
23
24
25
Q
Again, you've got to free
Since SB 54, has ICE sought warrants from
federal judges for criminal immigration offenses?
A
212-279-9424
We still prosecute criminal cases in the
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 158
1
gang activity and criminal activity within the
2
city of Escondido that we weren't privy to before.
3
So now that we're removed from that cooperative
4
working relationship, that's information we no
5
longer have.
6
And again, that would happen throughout
7
California.
Wherever there was task forces, a
8
local law enforcement agency task force, we lost
9
that intelligence.
We lost that information, or
10
their perspective on what they know.
11
better what's going on in their neighborhoods than
12
the feds do many times, so when you lose that, it
13
just results in less public safety, less
14
successful investigations.
15
16
Q
They know
Do you know how many LEAs have removed
themselves from task forces?
17
A
Not off the top of my head.
18
Q
Are there any examples you can point to?
19
A
Again, anecdotal, from speaking to Derek
20
Benner, because I always ask how it's going in
21
California.
22
agencies remove themselves.
23
where we did a human trafficking case, and the law
24
enforcement agency left it because there was a
25
immigration context.
212-279-9424
There has been law enforcement
There was one case
That was up in northern
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 160
1
2
us.
Q
And when the law enforcement agencies say
3
they don't want to work with ICE anymore, are they
4
providing a reason?
5
A
What's shared with me is that HSI wears
6
an ICE moniker that it has to do with immigration
7
enforcement, it has to be, you know, the current
8
legislation in California limiting cooperation and
9
information sharing.
Again, specifics, you'd have
10
to ask the SACs in those three areas.
11
relaying information that's shared with me through
12
conversation.
13
14
Q
I'm just
Are there still task forces that ICE is
involved in throughout California?
15
A
Yes.
16
Q
Do you know how many?
17
A
No.
18
Q
And do you know the -- how many task
19
forces ICE has been asked to leave since SB 54?
20
A
I don't have a number.
21
Q
Do you know if ICE was asked to leave
22
task forces in California before SB 54?
23
A
Not that I'm aware of.
24
Q
Is ICE able to obtain information it
25
seeks from the FBI?
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 162
1
moving, where do you think the load houses are
2
located?
3
These are conversations law enforcement
4
officers should have openly and sharing ideas, and
5
his experiences and his knowledge and how long
6
he's been in that neighborhood, and I don't think
7
anything can replace information sharing in task
8
forces, having face-to-face conversations and
9
trading information.
10
Q
And this is information -- the
11
information you're talking about, this is
12
information about criminal activity, correct?
13
A
Yes.
14
Q
So part of this is that you believe that
15
the information about criminal activity is not
16
being shared with ICE.
Is that -- is that --
17
A
Yes.
18
Q
Is that a part of your concern?
19
A
Yes.
20
Q
I would like to go to paragraph 72.
Have
21
the -- has SB 54's prohibitions on information
22
sharing between local law enforcement agencies and
23
ICE had an impact on HSI's counter-terrorism work?
24
A
It's reported to me that it has.
25
Q
Are there any specific examples that you
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 163
1
2
can share?
A
I believe it has to do with the JTTF task
3
force's -- the lack of participation.
4
Again,
information and ideas won't be shared.
5
Q
Are there any specific examples?
6
A
No.
I think it goes back to the
7
generality -- again, right now, what's a national
8
security case most of the time don't start out as
9
a national security case.
It starts as a local
10
crime.
11
they've got a -- they've got a -- they have a
12
funding mechanism.
13
to raise money, and they do that through, you
14
know -- whether it's bitcoin or whether it's
15
through cyber crime, whether it's through drug
16
sales, whether it's through, you know, counterfeit
17
goods.
18
Most terrorist organizations has --
They've got to -- they've got
That's where the lack of information may
19
not seem like a national security nexus, but it
20
will grow into a national security nexus.
21
our investigation in a national security sense
22
don't start as a national security case.
23
you don't have that level of cooperation on these
24
task forces and sharing of information, you're
25
going to build less information to support a
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
Most of
So when
212-490-3430
Page 164
1
national security case, or come across information
2
that would lead you to a national security nexus.
3
I don't have any specific examples, no.
4
This is -- again, this is briefings from my senior
5
staff, career professionals who have been criminal
6
investigators their entire career advising me of
7
what's happening on the ground.
8
9
Q
I would like to turn to paragraph 73.
In
that paragraph, you say, "SB 54 has also limited
10
ICE access to aliens who may assist in building
11
criminal cases, thus interfering with ICE's
12
ability to pursue the prosecution or removal of
13
aliens who pose particularly significant threats
14
to public safety or national security."
15
Do you see that?
16
A
Yes.
17
Q
Are there any circumstances where this
18
has happened since January 4th, 2018?
19
A
I think we have less access to aliens.
20
It's harder to find aliens because the county
21
jails are releasing them without notification to
22
ICE.
23
relationships are built in the jails.
24
where we build informants.
25
information.
212-279-9424
We don't have access to the jails.
Many
That's
That's where we get
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 165
1
Of course, an illegal alien that's in a
2
jail wants to get out of jail, wants to stay here
3
with a green card and wants to stay here with a
4
work authorization will assist us in our
5
investigation.
6
people and we have to go to try to find people, we
7
just have less to build cases from, less to build
8
our intelligence from.
9
about.
10
Q
But when we lose access to these
That's what this talks
Are there any public safety or national
11
security threats that you believe have been caused
12
because of SB 54?
13
A
I think when law enforcement agencies
14
aren't free to share information as partners,
15
intelligence will be lost.
16
detrimental to criminal investigations and
17
national security.
18
of the 9/11 commission.
19
enforcement agencies are comfortable in sharing
20
information.
21
enforcement officer, SB 54 limits that sharing.
22
Q
It's going to be
That was one of the findings
It's important that law
And in my opinion as a law
So is it fair to say that your
23
allegations in this paragraph are based on your
24
experience as a law enforcement officer rather
25
than specific examples?
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 176
1
CERTIFICATE OF NOTARY PUBLIC
2
I, Denise M. Brunet, the officer before
3
whom the foregoing deposition was taken, do hereby
4
certify that the witness whose testimony appears
5
in the foregoing deposition was sworn by me; that
6
the testimony of said witness was taken by me
7
stenographically and thereafter reduced to print
8
by means of computer-assisted transcription by me
9
to the best of my ability; that I am neither
10
counsel for, related to, nor employed by any of
11
the parties to this litigation and have no
12
interest, financial or otherwise, in the outcome
13
of this matter.
14
15
<%Signature%>
16
Denise M. Brunet
17
Notary Public in and for
18
The District of Columbia
19
20
21
My commission expires:
22
December 14, 2022
23
24
25
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 177
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF DEPONENT
1
2
3
I hereby declare under penalty of perjury
4
that I have read the foregoing transcript of my
5
deposition and except for any corrections or
6
changes noted on the errata sheet, I hereby
7
subscribe to the transcript as an accurate
8
record of
made by me.
9
10
11
12
....._,,;
13
4 1-.'-( - J r'
14
15
r
DATE
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
EXHIBIT B
FILED PROVISIONALLY UNDER SEAL
EXHIBIT C
FILED PROVISIONALLY UNDER SEAL
EXHIBIT D
FILED PROVISIONALLY UNDER SEAL
EXHIBIT E
Page 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
UNTIED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
:
THE UNITED STATES OF
:
AMERICA,
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
vs.
: No. 18-264
:
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA;
:
EDMUND GERALD BROWN, JR.,
:
Governor of California, in
:
his Official Capacity;AND
:
XAVIER BECERRA, Attorney
:
General of California, in
:
his Official Capacity,,
:
:
Defendants.
:
:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF:
TODD A. HOFFMAN
DATE:
TIME:
LOCATION:
REPORTED BY:
Thursday, April 12, 2018
9:23 a.m.
Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C.
Denise M. Brunet, RPR
Reporter/Notary
21
22
23
24
25
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
A P P E A R A N C E S
On behalf of the Plaintiff:
EREZ REUVENI, ESQUIRE
LAUREN BINGHAM, ESQUIRE
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Division
450 5th Street, Northwest
Washington, D.C.
20530
(202) 307-4293
erez.reuveni@usdoj.gov
On behalf of the Defendants:
CHRISTINE CHUANG, ESQUIRE
State of California
Department of Justice
Bureau of Children's Justice
1515 Clay Street
Suite 2100
Oakland, California
94612
(510) 879-0094
christine.chuang.doj.ca.gov
LEE I. SHERMAN, ESQUIRE
CHEROKEE DM MELTON, ESQUIRE
SATOSHI YANAI, ESQUIRE
State of California
Department of Justice
300 S. Spring Street
Suite 1702
Los Angeles, California
90013
(213) 269-6404
lee.sherman@doj.ca.gov
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
ALSO PRESENT:
22
Julie A.G. Koller
Louisa Slocum
Liana G.T. Wolf
Dan Reidy, Videographer
23
24
25
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 41
1
A
I'm sorry.
2
Q
That's all right.
3
A
Yeah, the 170.
4
Q
That 170 refers to individuals who were
5
turned over in 2017, correct?
6
A
Correct.
7
Q
Do you know the number of individuals
8
turned over from San Diego field office in 2018?
9
A
I don't know a number specifically now.
10
Q
Do you know that number for the
11
Los Angeles field office?
12
A
For '18?
13
Q
How about for the San Francisco field
14
15
office in 2018?
A
I do not.
16
17
I do not.
MS. MELTON:
Can we take a five-minute
break?
18
MR. REUVENI:
19
THE VIDEOGRAPHER:
20
record.
Sure.
We're going off the
The time on the video is 10:11 a.m.
21
(Whereupon, a short recess was taken.)
22
THE VIDEOGRAPHER:
23
unit number two.
24
10:23 a.m.
25
This begins media
BY MS. MELTON:
212-279-9424
The time on the video is
We are on the record.
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 46
1
national level.
2
directors are working through this issue now.
3
It's still relatively early in the process, but we
4
are looking at what we need to do at a national
5
level currently.
6
Q
Quite frankly, the field
So there have been no specific policy
7
changes with respect to California and how -- and
8
if individuals are paroled to law enforcement
9
agencies?
10
A
Not at the headquarters level at this
11
time.
Field directors, it's their specific --
12
locations are taking their own actions at this
13
time --
14
Q
What if --
15
A
-- according --
16
Q
I'm sorry.
17
A
-- according to the situation they're
18
19
20
21
encountering.
Q
What does that mean, they're taking
their own actions at this time?
A
Well, for instance, the San Diego port
22
of entry, since the passage of SB 54, I think, on
23
average, are turning five to six criminal aliens.
24
They are removing them immediately at the port of
25
entry verse turning them over to the state and
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 47
1
local agency that wants the individual because we
2
have no assurance we're going to get that
3
individual back.
4
in court.
5
alien at the port of entry.
6
Q
So they're not seeing their day
We take the action of removing that
Are there any circumstances in which
7
you are transferring individuals, aliens to law
8
enforcement agencies in California?
9
A
I'm sure they are.
Again, based on the
10
charge and, again, that's a discretionary decision
11
that's made by the field leadership in that
12
specific location based on the charge, based on
13
maybe the level of cooperation they have with the
14
specific state and local entity.
15
Again, a lot of that may be governed by
16
the charge itself, whether we want them to see
17
their day in court or be removed at the port of
18
entry, with the understanding we may be exposed on
19
the back end and our authority may be undermined
20
if they're subsequently released without our
21
notification.
22
Q
Prior to SB 54, in these counties where
23
you might have -- in these counties where you
24
couldn't be assured that somebody would be
25
returned to you if you paroled them, under what
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 52
1
Q
Do you know how many individuals OFO
2
has chosen not or decided not to transfer to law
3
enforcement agencies in California in 2018?
4
A
How many specifically?
No, other than
5
what I stated earlier.
6
average, about five to six a month they are not
7
turning over criminal aliens to the state and
8
locals.
9
10
11
Q
I know San Diego is, on
I'm sorry, what is five or six a month
for San Diego?
A
Five or six criminal aliens who are
12
arriving in the San Diego ports of entry who are
13
not being turned over to state and locals.
14
15
Q
And all of those individuals are being
removed immediately?
16
A
They would be removed, correct.
17
Q
So you're no longer transferring
18
individuals from the San Diego POE to a law
19
enforcement agency?
20
A
No.
21
Q
Okay.
22
23
That's not what I said.
There are cases where those
individuals are being transferred?
A
Again, it's discretionary based on the
24
field leadership in that location, based on the
25
charge, based on if they believe they're going to
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 53
1
get the individual back.
2
should see their day in court has a higher
3
priority than removing that individual
4
immediately.
5
they make decisions based on that, their
6
experience and their expertise in that area.
7
8
Q
Whether they think they
All those things are weighed in and
Okay.
Thank you.
Let's go to
paragraph 19, please.
9
Are you ready to start?
10
A
Oh, yes.
11
Q
Do you know of any task force, task
12
forces that have been negatively impacted by
13
SB 54?
14
A
15
16
No.
I'm not aware of any impact at
this time.
Q
Okay.
On page 20 of that same
17
paragraph, you talk about a chilling effect on
18
existing relationships with state and local
19
partners.
20
21
What do you mean by chilling effect?
A
Well, again, chilling effect
22
essentially working side by side with fellow law
23
enforcement officers in various capacities,
24
whether it's a task force or where they're coming
25
to the port of entry to pick up warrants and
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 74
1
2
how they became known to the officers.
Q
Do you know how much after the time of
3
release that the field office found out that the
4
person was released?
5
6
A
No.
I do not know that level of
detail.
7
MR. SHERMAN:
I would like to mark as
8
confidential Hoffman Exhibit 12 this document that
9
is Bates number 6 through 11.
10
(Hoffman Confidential Deposition
11
Exhibit Number 12 was marked for
12
identification.)
13
14
15
BY MR. SHERMAN:
Q
Officer Hoffman, are you familiar with
this document?
16
A
Yes, I am.
17
Q
What is this document?
18
A
Again, this is a detainer for this
19
individual, again, wanted via a state or local
20
warrant.
21
this is the document that executed that
22
transaction.
23
24
25
Q
We in turn turned that person over and
Which jurisdiction was this person
turned over to?
A
212-279-9424
I'm not -- unless I'm missing the
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 75
1
obvious here, if it's stated, I don't see it in
2
the documentation you provided, whether it's
3
Los Angeles, could be Los Angeles County sheriffs
4
or Orange County.
5
Q
Do you have any independent knowledge
6
beyond the documentation of who -- of which
7
jurisdiction this person was turned over to?
8
9
A
I don't recall.
At one point, I think
I knew, but I don't recall right now.
I believe
10
this was a fraud charge but not certain which
11
entity they were turned over to within the state.
12
I thought it was one of those two county sheriffs,
13
but I believe it was -- it might have been Orange
14
County, but, again, I'm not seeing that in the
15
documentation you provided.
16
Q
I would just like to represent for the
17
record that this was the documentation that was
18
provided to us today that we are showing to you.
19
Do you know what criminal offense the
20
person was charged for?
21
that you're referring to?
22
23
24
25
A
Was it this fraud offense
My recollection, this was a fraud
offense and a warrant for fraud.
Q
Do you know if this individual had any
prior criminal conviction?
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 76
1
A
Not to my knowledge.
2
Q
How did CBP come into contact with this
3
4
5
person?
A
This person was an applicant for
admission.
6
Q
What were the circumstances of that?
7
A
I'm not -- I don't know the specific
8
circumstances.
I assume they arrived at the
9
Los Angeles International Airport and upon
10
processing is when we determined that they had a
11
NCIC action against them and then we followed up
12
with the originating agency.
13
Q
And CBP released this person to an LEA?
14
A
I'm sorry?
15
Q
Let me -- did CBP release this person
16
17
to a law enforcement agency?
A
Yes.
It would be the same.
In this
18
case, at Los Angeles Airport, we would turn the
19
individual over to Los Angeles World Airlines
20
Police Department and then they would work with
21
the originating agency to do the second turn over.
22
Q
Do you know if the law enforcement
23
agency that this person ultimately went into
24
custody with released this person?
25
A
212-279-9424
Yes.
It's information received from
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 77
1
the field as, again, this person -- the detainer
2
was not honored.
3
public.
4
they have no status in the United States and they
5
were released.
6
7
Q
This person was released to the
They're still an applicant for admission,
Do you know when the law enforcement
agency released the person?
8
A
I do not know the specifics.
9
Q
Do you know how the field office found
10
11
out that the person was released?
A
Again, like the similar case, it was
12
brought to their attention by doing research and
13
via public website.
14
15
16
Q
Do you know if the person reoffended
after release?
A
17
I do not know.
MR. SHERMAN:
I would like to mark as
18
Hoffman Exhibit 13, confidential, and this is
19
document Bates numbered 12 through 17.
20
(Hoffman Confidential Deposition
21
Exhibit Number 13 was marked for
22
identification.)
23
24
25
BY MR. SHERMAN:
Q
Officer Hoffman, are you familiar with
this document?
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 86
1
individuals were released at the same time, the
2
two that we intercepted.
3
4
Q
And CBP picked up the -- both
individuals at around the same time?
5
A
Yes.
6
Q
And was this person returned to Mexico
7
That's my understanding.
as well?
8
A
This person was returned to Mexico.
9
Q
Can I turn your attention to paragraph
10
15 of your declaration, which is Exhibit 10.
11
A
Paragraph 15?
12
Q
Yes.
13
A
Okay.
14
Q
Are the documents that are marked
15
Exhibits 11, 12, 13 and 14 the documents that you
16
believe support your allegations in paragraph 15?
17
A
You said 11, 12, 13, 14?
18
Q
That's correct.
19
A
Yes.
20
21
They support part of the
allegations.
Q
Are there any other instance that you
22
would identify to support your allegations in
23
paragraph 15?
24
25
A
Yes.
Also in the Los Angeles area,
there were four individuals released and the only
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 87
1
reason we knew they were released is they showed
2
up to our deferred inspection office looking for
3
their documents.
4
5
Q
And what circumstances were those?
What were the -- let me step back.
6
What were the -- let's go one by one.
7
For the first one, under what
8
circumstances did CBP come in contact with the
9
person?
10
A
Under the first?
11
Q
You said there were four other
12
circumstances, correct?
13
A
Correct.
14
Q
So let's go one by one.
So for the
15
first of those circumstances, when did CBP come in
16
contact with the person?
17
A
I don't have the specific dates and
18
times in which they presented themself to the
19
deferred inspection office.
20
aware of is that, you know, we had a detainer
21
against these individuals.
22
from custody and then they went to deferred
23
inspection looking for their documents that we
24
retained during the proceeding.
25
became aware that they were released.
212-279-9424
The only thing I'm
They were released
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
And that's how we
212-490-3430
Page 88
1
2
Q
And do you know when these incidents
occurred?
3
A
Not off the top of my head.
4
Q
Were they before January 2018?
5
A
I believe they were, but I'm not
6
exactly certain, but I think they were sometime in
7
2017.
8
9
10
11
Q
Do you know if any of these persons had
a criminal history?
A
They had -- obviously, they had
criminal records.
That's why we turned them over.
12
Q
Do you know --
13
A
I believe grand theft, burglary,
14
15
16
17
18
19
assault.
Q
Do you know if they had any criminal
convictions?
A
or not.
Q
I'm not aware if they had convictions
I don't have that level of detail.
And then when they came -- and can you
20
describe a little bit the circumstances in which
21
they came back to CBP?
22
A
I'm not -- I don't know the specific
23
circumstances, but the process, again, in my
24
experience in LA where these occurred is if we
25
have a criminal alien, we will parole them in.
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
We
212-490-3430
Page 89
1
will issue a detainer, the 247, and then we will
2
order a deferred inspection.
3
keep their entry documents and those would be
4
forwarded to their deferred inspection offices
5
downtown LA at the federal building.
6
where we keep the information, keep the record,
7
because deferred inspection officers help handle
8
the back end of the case.
9
And that's -- we
And that's
If they were called, the field
10
inspection officers would be the officers that
11
would go effectuate the transfer, in this
12
situation, and take custody of those individuals,
13
but since they were released, the individuals then
14
came to us looking for their documents.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Q
So they came to the deferred inspection
office?
A
They came to the deferred inspection
office.
Q
And at that time, what happened with
these -A
I'm not exactly sure what happened, but
22
they should have all been taken into custody and
23
removed.
24
25
Q
So other than Exhibits 11, 12, 13, 14
and these four instances, are there any other
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 90
1
incidence that you would identify to support your
2
allegations in paragraph 15?
3
4
A
In paragraph 15, no, I don't believe
so.
5
MR. SHERMAN:
I would like to identify
6
as Hoffman Confidential Exhibit 15 the document
7
that's Bates numbered 27 to 32.
8
(Hoffman Confidential Deposition
9
Exhibit Number 15 was marked for
10
11
12
13
identification.)
BY MR. SHERMAN:
Q
Officer Hoffman, are you familiar with
this document?
14
A
Yes.
15
Q
What is this document?
16
A
Well, this is essentially the secondary
17
case, the secondary referral form, and then a
18
withdraw of application form.
19
20
Q
Was this person transferred to a law
enforcement agency within California?
21
A
This individual was not transferred.
22
Q
Why was that?
23
A
Because, in this case, the LAWA police
24
department did not honor the detainer.
25
not take possession of the individual.
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
They did
212-490-3430
Page 99
1
A
Not for Los Angeles County.
2
Q
For any other jurisdiction in
3
California?
4
A
Again, only to the degree it relates to
5
San Diego County or San Diego area where
6
previously discussed they were refusing five to
7
six criminal aliens on average a month and not
8
turning them over to the state and local agencies.
9
Q
And is -- since January 2018, has CBP
10
attempted to transfer person -- individuals who --
11
who there's an active warrant to Los Angeles law
12
enforcement?
13
A
I'm not sure I have that information.
14
Q
How about any other jurisdictions in
15
California, CBP transferring those -- attempting
16
to transfer those individuals to local law
17
enforcement --
18
19
20
A
I don't have direct knowledge.
So it's
difficult for me to answer.
Q
Can you turn to paragraph 21 of your
21
declaration.
22
impact on OFO's ability to execute submissions at
23
point of entries in California?
24
25
A
How has SB 54 had a significant
Well, again, just fundamentally, I
think it's probably the eight cases that we
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 103
1
2
system, people should see their day in court.
Q
And has that -- has that --
3
consideration of the charges, has that changed
4
because of SB 54?
5
A
No.
I mean, I think we're in
6
discussions now as SB 54 evolves.
We're still
7
relatively new into it here is what this is going
8
to look like.
9
at the field level at the discretion of the
Again, it's really taking place now
10
various field leadership in those locations and
11
we're trying to find out, you know, determine what
12
we might want to do at a national level to assist
13
and to be a little more consistent.
14
Q
And I just want to clarify when you
15
were referring to Imperial County.
16
was Imperial County not complying with detainer
17
requests?
18
A
Yeah.
Before SB 54,
The two cases I believe we
19
openly discussed, unless I'm mistaken, was the
20
October and December prior.
21
if we discussed them or not.
22
discuss them.
23
County in October and December whereby -- the same
24
jail where two individuals were released without
25
prior notification.
212-279-9424
Maybe -- I'm not sure
Maybe we didn't
But there are two cases in Imperial
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Page 108
1
CERTIFICATE OF NOTARY PUBLIC
2
I, Denise M. Brunet, the officer before
3
whom the foregoing deposition was taken, do hereby
4
certify that the witness whose testimony appears
5
in the foregoing deposition was duly sworn by me;
6
that the testimony of said witness was taken by me
7
in stenotype and thereafter reduced to typewriting
8
under my direction; that said deposition is a true
9
record of the testimony given by said witness;
10
that I am neither counsel for, related to, nor
11
employed by any of the parties to the action in
12
which this deposition was taken; and, further,
13
that I am not a relative or employee of any
14
counsel or attorney employed by the parties
15
hereto, nor financially or otherwise interested in
16
the outcome of this action.
17
18
<%Signature%>
Denise M. Brunet
19
Notary Public in and for the
District of Columbia
20
21
22
My commission expires:
23
December 14, 2022
24
25
212-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
212-490-3430
Pa ge 109
ACKNOWLED GMENT OF DEPONENT
1
2
3
I
hereby declare under penalty of perjury
4
that I
have read the foregoing transcript of my
5
d eposition and e x cept for any c o rr ections o r
6
changes noted on the errata sheet ,
7
subscribe to the transcript as an accurate
8
record of the statements made by me .
I
hereby
9
10
11
12
TODD A .
HOFFMAN
13
14
15
DATE
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2 12-279-9424
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
2 12-490-3430
Page 110
E R R A T A
1
2
IN RE:
U.S.A . vs.
3
DATE:
4/12/2018
4
PAGE
LINE
5
\'3
6
1\
7
-~ 16
15
10
\9
S H E E T
8
5
9
10
·(Q
i
11
l]
12
13
14
3q
~lo.
17
Lt(a
21
22
23
24
25
•
l....:
1'
..J
11 •
L
,
unm(}fQDLQ .
r
l \Q(uuIT .. .l A )
...1.
,Jt,J
re,mo'>L€., ' oaf' l';yro3CW>rncal fcoT)
Ch°'¥}€, 1\,D,tl) v-X:\~\" \:D ' ths,~(Mfil')( (~~Jtf11' Ce(/
c.hcfi82. \::u '1<1 IO\- ct avf d Q h1 Cl)Ynf) -vmr)
TEC&\, (\~\?08D:J9}),c ol e@r)
1
mm
~
1>
3~
16
20
{:.lJ\9fil~un Sbc,a\u ,~
:\
I
32
-1}_
19
CORRECTION AND REASON
1\
1-: 1
15
18
5 J
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
_lfu__
Y9
~q_
5t)_
5\
io
\1
~3
25
1
_1__
Co
\I
1#7' ---- ~
(DATE)
212-279-9424
TODD A.
,?- ------
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
HOFFMAN
212-490-3430
Page 111
1
S H E E T
E R R A T A
2
IN RE:
U.S . A . vs.
3
DATE:
PAGE
LINE
5
5:l
N U E D
4/12/2018
4
C O N T I
6
7
Cao
G\
7
\ '9
13
8
(~L\
9
(,g~
10
"71
7(9
12
:b]
\:t,
gy
\(u
CORRECTION AND REASON
ch~
/I vJ
}aj' ·o ('IV h,lg,, c~'20,~ C(a 1 tmf'
r
(~'y),'
( boo~ . Clf\d ' m 0:c/ (hp cre[Wbicc,) :£XXDf"J
11
11
,.
)\ ru ,.
lS
11
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
13
14
R
15
\00
16
\()0
17
\0\
18
\ C) \
19
\O
l
l\
\i
\9
G
I Li
'lLJ
i:::i
0
15
l
Che~, ''tbeknc8~1' ro ''fukn}e\vfhl~Pif/f~'·wt
Cb(ll)9Q ' c€n1~ C\h)f' \--p ' [fmDJ a\'' (\o <
,
~n:ect ,o\
o..,, li)j~opn1ce }{NYOr)
\ , r)
\
a \ a JjP~CCpb, , aiI
J
WQl\g-ej "\:bw-\:'' tu 11±b!fc:lJi> (hjpDLJJJ{)n' c<:tf ~r)
chcn9£, '%f,r '' ru ·ru.. U
t
~p~f c
pb, ' ·i .rfuaM d (ncPYYf et vr~)
cul{\tf,
IA ,.
,,
, \A,.. ,,
\A) 1TJ'
L-..
, u
II
"
( L
•
1
"'
i\
11
<;.
20
23
24
25
(DATE)
2 12-279-9424
)
TODD A . HOFFMAN
Veritext Legal Solutions
www.veritext.com
2 12-490-3430
EXHIBIT F
FILED PROVISIONALLY UNDER SEAL
EXHIBIT G
FILED PROVISIONALLY UNDER SEAL
EXHIBIT H
FILED PROVISIONALLY UNDER SEAL
EXHIBIT I
FILED PROVISIONALLY UNDER SEAL
EXHIBIT J
Alameda County Sheriff's Office
https://www.alamedacountysheriff.org/dc_srj.php
Home
Quick Links
Agency Divisions
Careers
Regional Training Center
Contact
Santa Rita Jail
5325 Broder Blvd.
Dublin, CA 94568
(925) 551-6500
Bail, Booking and Release Information
Charges, custody status, court dates, bail amounts, release dates and other inmate information can be obtained 24 hours a day, seven days a
week by calling 1-925-551-6500. You must have the inmate's name, PFN (Person File Number), or correct date of birth before obtaining
information.
Bail can be posted in the Santa Rita Jail lobby 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Inmates who are determined to be eligible for release, will be released as quickly as possible. However, this procedure can take up to
several hours. It is recommended that you wait until receiving a telephone call from the released inmate before coming to the jail.
Inmates granted release while at court must return to the jail to complete all necessary paperwork. The inmate will receive all
personal property and be released from the jail facility.
Inmates being released who are indigent, have inadequate clothing for climatic conditions, do not have clothing available at the time
of release, or who can no longer fit into their clothing, will be provided appropriate welfare clothing.
Inmates who have no money upon release are given a free bus passe or a free B.A.R.T. ticket. The inmates are also provided with
transportation schedules and directions to the B.A.R.T. station if they choose to walk.
Pending Release: Once jail staff have determined an inmate may be eligible for release from custody, the inmate is identified as a “pending
release” and the release process is initiated. The release process is a multistep administrative process that may take several hours to
complete. During this process, a search of law enforcement databases is conducted to determine if the inmate has any outstanding warrants
and/or holds that may prevent their release from custody. Should any other legal holding authority be located during this process, the inmate
will not be released from custody and the inmate will no longer appear as a “Pending Release.”
Expected (EXP)Release Date: Is the date a sentenced inmate will have completed serving time on that specific case, provided no penalties
for misbehavior are incurred, no other cases are sentenced to additional jail time and/or no other pending un-sentenced cases are located.
Prior to an inmate’s release from custody, the inmate will begin the initial release process as described above and the inmate will appear as a
“Pending Release.” Inmates with pending local cases, warrants or holds from other jurisdictions will not necessarily be released on the Exp.
Release Date.
Emergencies
Inmate Services handles all outside emergencies ( please refer to the Inmate Services section ). You can reach the Inmate Services Section at
(925) 551-6580, Monday through Friday, from 8:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M., excluding holidays.
Santa Rita Jail after hours emergency number: (925) 551-6500
1 of 9
5/1/2018, 8:08 PM
Alameda County Sheriff's Office
https://www.alamedacountysheriff.org/dc_srj.php
Mail Procedures
MAILING
ADDRESS
Santa Rita Jail
Inmate's name and PFN#
5325 Broder Blvd.
Dublin, CA 94568
Incoming Mail
Mail will be distributed daily (Monday through Friday, excluding weekends and holidays). Mail will be delivered only to the
addressee.
Incoming mail MUST have the inmate's name AND PFN.
Incoming mail MUST have the name and address of the sender on the outside of the envelope.
All mail sent to, or from, any inmate may be opened and inspected by jail staff outside the presence of the inmate involved (except
legal mail).
Incoming mail with any perceived bio-hazard (i.e. lipstick, gloss, perfume/cologne, etc) shall be returned to sender.
Envelopes and letters containing address labels, stickers, tape, glued surface (homemade cards) shall be returned to sender.
Items which are considered contraband and will cause the mail to be returned to the sender are envelopes, stamps, and writing
materials.
Sexually explicit drawings on the outside of mailing envelopes will cause U.S. Postal authorities to return the envelope to sender.
Incoming mail from attorneys or governmental officials will be opened by the jail staff in the presence of the inmate involved.
Money may be sent by MONEY ORDER or CASHIER'S CHECK ONLY. Personal checks and cash will be returned to sender
(refer to money section).
Reading Materials
NEW Books and Magazines (Limit of six (6) per day) are allowed to receive through the mail (NO HARDBACK BOOKS
ALLOWED) - PROVIDED THESE ITEMS ARE SENT DIRECTLY FROM THE PUBLISHER OR "ON LINE"
BOOKSTORE, such as Amazon.com and Barnes and Noble.com, etc. On-line bookstore must have a legitimate website that is
verifiable and allows consumers to order directly. Any website that re-directs to another website for ordering is not accepted.
PACKAGES MUST BE PROFESSIONALLY LABELED and recognized as an on-line bookstore. Books from private sellers will
be returned.
Envelopes, magazines, and periodicals sent to inmates may not exceed 8-1/2" x 14". Any mail exceeding this size will be returned to
sender.
Inmate newspaper subscriptions must be made directly to the newspaper company by a third party. Cancellation or change of address
for subscriptions must be made directly to the newspaper company. Newspapers will then be distributed through regular mail
channels. Weekend and Holiday newspapers will be distributed the next working day. Newspapers for inmates no longer in custody
will be disposed of by the mail room staff. (Each housing unit receives six daily Tribune newspapers, paid for by the Inmate Welfare
Fund).
Photographs
Photographs may not be larger than 4" x 6".
A maximum of ten (10) photographs may be mailed to inmates in an envelope at a time.
Polaroid and negative photographs are not accepted.
Photographs that are altered or blacked out in any manner shall be returned to sender.
Photographs or pictures that are pornographic, nude, suggestive, showing gangs, gang tattoos, or hand gestures (signs) are not
allowed.
Money
The Alameda County Sheriff's Office takes pride in the services provided to inmates; including meals, library services and inmate programs.
In addition, the Sheriff's Office provides the opportunity for inmates to purchase additional items such as snacks, soups, drinks, stationary,
hygiene supplies, medicines, and specialty items for women, to name a few. All proceeds from the sale of these items go directly to the
Inmate Welfare Fund. This fund is used to support the numerous programs offered to inmates, as well as the televisions, games, recreational
supplies, etc.
PLEASE FOLLOW THE FOLLOWING PROCEDURE:
Deposits may be made by mail or in person. Only cash or money orders will be accepted for deposits on inmates accounts' (NO
PERSONAL, PAYROLL, TAX REFUND OR SOCIAL SECURITY CHECKS OR COINS). Do not send cash through the mail.
If depositing money in person, you must have the exact amount. NO CHANGE WILL BE GIVEN. If you have been an inmate within
the last six months, you may not deposit money on another inmate's account.
2 of 9
5/1/2018, 8:08 PM
Alameda County Sheriff's Office
https://www.alamedacountysheriff.org/dc_srj.php
Visitors must produce valid photo identification (driver's license, military, etc.) and have the inmate's PFN before depositing money
on the inmate's account.
Money orders must be made out as follows:
The Alameda County Sheriff's Office (ACSO)
c/o Inmate's Name and PFN
HOURS FOR MONEY DEPOSITS
Seven days a week, 24 hours a day. Although you may deposit money 24 hours a day, it is recommended you do so during normal lobby
hours from 8:00am to 6:30pm.
Property
Property releases and clothing exchange transactions will be accepted 24 hours a day at the Santa Rita Jail ( SRJ ).
Property Release requests forms must be submitted by the inmate and received by lobby personnel prior to the day the visitor will be
picking up the property. This usually takes up to 7 working days at SRJ.
It is required that you provide photo identification when receiving the released property. It is recommended that you call the lobby to ensure
the property is ready for pick-up.
Santa Rita Jail: (925) 551-6500
Court clothing for inmates will only be accepted at the Lobby within 72 hours of a jury trial, preliminary examination, or if a Court Order
has been received. You may only bring a maximum of two sets of clothing. The clothing in the inmate's property must be taken during the
exchange. Clothing is exchanged on a one-for-one basis.
All medications are provided to inmates through Prison Health Services. Lobby personnel will accept prescription glasses, dentures and
contact lenses solution in sealed packages. It is recommended that you coordinate with Prison Health Services prior to leaving items in the
lobby (925) 551-6700.
Telephone Calls
Pay phones are available to all inmates daily. However, inmates can only make collect telephone calls.
In order to eliminate problems associated with 3-way calling, the telephone system in use automatically terminates the call if an
attempt is made to connect a third party.
If you have call waiting, be advised the telephone system in use may terminate your call if the call waiting "click" is heard. The
system cannot differentiate between the call waiting "click" and the 3-way calling "click".
Private citizens can prevent collect calls by having a BLOCK put on their personal phone line. This can be done by contacting your
local telephone company.
Vehicle Impoundment
If a vehicle was impounded upon arrest, you will need to contact the arresting police agency to determine the documentation needed for the
release of the vehicle. It is often necessary to provide a written letter from the registered owner authorizing the release of the vehicle.
Inmates can release keys to the vehicle, by simply filling out a property release request form. Keys must be picked up in the lobby of the jail
in which the inmate is being housed. It is recommended that you call the jail lobby to ensure the keys are ready for pick-up.
** Santa Rita Jail Facility (925) 551-6500 **
Visiting
Please refer to the Santa Rita Jail Visiting page.
Santa Rita Jail Facts
The original Santa Rita Jail opened in January 1947. It served as a replacement for the original County Prison Farm that operated on 275
acres next to Fairmont Hospital in San Leandro. The old Santa Rita Jail encompassed about 1000 acres of a World War II military base
known as Camp Schumacher that was adjacent to the existing site of the Camp Parks Reserve Training Center. The original site included a
Navy Brig that was converted into a maximum-security facility known as Greystone. A wire-enclosed complex of eight barracks was
converted into a minimum and medium security facility that was known as the Compound. Women were housed in a horseshoe shaped
barracks known as Women's Quarters.
Over time, the Santa Rita Jail became overcrowded and the changing demographics of the jail population made it difficult and costly to
operate the aging facility in a safe and secure manner. In 1983 Design and development of the "new" Santa Rita began. Construction costs
of the new Santa Rita Jail totaled about $172 million. State bonds augmented by matching local funds made the project possible. On
September 1, 1989, Sheriff Charles C. Plummer gave the order to open the facility and inmates were transferred from the old to the new jail.
The New Santa Rita Jail
The facility holds about 4000 inmates housed in one of eighteen modern housing units. It is considered a "mega-jail" and ranks as the third
3 of 9
5/1/2018, 8:08 PM
Alameda County Sheriff's Office
https://www.alamedacountysheriff.org/dc_srj.php
largest facility in California and the fifth largest in the nation. Santa Rita is accredited by the American Correctional Association, thus
making it the only facility in California holding this prestigious award.
It is recognized as one of the most technologically innovative jails in the world. A robotic system speeds delivery of laundry, supplies and
food to all areas of the 113-acre campus. State-of-the-art criminal justice systems serve the internal operation while the largest rooftop solar
power system converts enough electricity to power nearly one-half of the facilities electrical needs during daylight hours.
Sheriff Ahern's philosophy of cost-effective delivery of services is reflected in the private sector partnerships that support the jail's
operation. A modem cook-chill food service operation produces 12,000 economical meals per day. On site medical and mental health
services saves money while reducing the patient load at county medical facilities.
Throughout its history, the Santa Rita Jail Facility has served the criminal justice system and contributed to the safety of the citizen of the
County of Alameda by providing a safe, secure and humane environment for inmates and staff.
Home
About Us
Disclaimer
Mission Statement
Privacy Policy
Quick Links
Most Wanted
ACSO Retiree's
Adopt a Pet
Alarm Program
Anonymous Tip
CCW License
Community Events
Deputy Sheriffs' Association
"2.1.1" Eden I & R
Forms
Glenn Dyer Jail Visiting
Inmate Locator
Jenny Lin Murder Investigation
My Care Pack
Operation My Home Town Food Hub Project
Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA)
Santa Rita Jail Visiting
SB 34 ALPR
SB 741 Cellular Interception
SB 741 DA's Cellular Interception Policy
Sheriff's Sales
Text to 911
VINE (Victim Information and Notification Everyday)
Youth and Family Services
Agency Divisions
Sheriff's Administration
Agency Watch Commander
Countywide Services
Detention and Corrections
Eden Township Division
Law Enforcement Services
Management Services
Urban Area Security
Careers
4 of 9
5/1/2018, 8:08 PM
EXHIBIT K
Alameda County Sheriffs Decision to Make Inmate Release Dates Pu ...
https ://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/arc hi ves/2018/04/0 3/al ...
Login/ CreateAcrom1t
OAKLAND, BERKELEY, AND EAST BAY NEWS, EVENTS, RESTAURANTS, MUSIC, & ARTS
News
Archives I RSS
SUBSCRIBE
TUESDAY, APRIL 3, 2018
Alameda County Sheriff's Decision to Make Inmate
Release Dates Public Stirs Concern Among Immigrant
Rights Advocates
By o,mvtn 8onc/Gr,1twn
Email
Tweet
Print
dick to enlarge
ALAMEDA COUNlY SHERIFF'S OFFICE FACEBOOK
Alameda County Sheriff Gregory Ahern.
The Alameda County Sheriffs Office recently instituted a new
policy of making the release dates of inmates from county jails
public on its "inmate locator" website. The move coincides with
similar steps taken by the Orange County Sheriffs Office last
month to publish inmate release dates as a means of
circumventing the state "sanctuary" law, SB 54.
But unlike Orange County, where the sheriff said it's their
intention to help federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement
agents, the Alameda County Sheriff's Office said today that their
decision to make release dates public isn't about working with
ICE.
"It's part of a broader purpose of being transparent," said Sgt.
Ray l
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?