Reem v. Hennessy

Filing 14

ORDER for supplemental briefing. The parties shall file simultaneous supplemental briefs by Dec. 11 and reply briefs by Dec. 14. The Court sets a hearing in this matter on Dec. 15. (crblc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/4/2017)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

JAMES REEM,
Petitioner,

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

Case No. 17-cv-06628-CRB

v.
VICKI HENNESSY,

ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES TO
SUBMIT SUPPLEMENTAL
BRIEFING

Respondent.
On Nov. 16, 2017, James Reem filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in this

14

Court, challenging his conditional release on bail. Dkt. 1. Arguing on behalf of the

15

respondent, the California Attorney General did not dispute that Reem was entitled to the

16

writ, but instead argued that this Court should abstain from deciding the matter under

17

Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). It did not brief the merits.

18

On Nov. 29, the Court granted Reem’s petition, but stayed its order to afford the

19

California Superior Court an opportunity to hold another detention hearing. The Superior

20

Court did so, see dkt. 11, and Reem moved this Court to withdraw the stay, arguing that

21

the hearing afforded was constitutionally inadequate, dkt. 9. The parties appeared before

22

this Court today, Dec. 4, to discuss whether the stay should be withdrawn. At the hearing,

23

it became apparent that, unlike in the earlier detention hearings in Reem’s case, there are

24

significant disputes between the parties not only as to whether the Nov. 30 hearing was

25

adequate, but as to what the Due Process Clause requires of pretrial detention hearings,

26

particularly those where the defendant is indigent.

27
28

Further briefing from the parties would be helpful in resolving these issues and
ultimately determining whether to grant Reem’s request to withdraw the stay. Given the