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)

Download PDF
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 The parties appeared before 22 this Court today, Dec. 4, to discuss whether the stay should be withdrawn.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

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?