Case o' The Week: Death, Taxes, and CJA Contributions - Robertson and CJA Contributions After Death
Ab initio, but not finito.
United States v. Carri Robertson, 2020 WL 6604323 (9th Cir. Nov. 12, 2020), decision available here.
Players: Decision by DJ Stearns, joined by Judges Bybee and Collins.
Facts: Joseph Robertson was appointed an AFPD after being indicted for environmental crimes. Id. at *1. His first trial resulted in a hung jury and mistrial. Id. Assets revealed in that trial prompted the court to order CJA contributions. Id. at *2.
Robertson was convicted at his second trial, lost in the Ninth, and
sought cert.
Robertson died while his petition was pending,
and SCOTUS GVR’ed the petition. Id. at *2.
On remand, the Ninth granted the motion of Carri Robertson (Robertson’s
widow) vacated Joseph Robertson’s conviction and sentence ab initio, and
directed refund of the amounts he had paid towards special assessments and
restitution. Id.
On remand the district judge, however, held that the CJA contribution
order was not abated. Id.
Widow Carri Robertson appealed. Id.
“Whether a CJA reimbursement order falls within the scope of the
abatement of an indictment is a matter of first impression for this court.” Id.
at *3.
Held: “Because a CJA reimbursement may be ordered in the absence of a conviction (after a mistrial, in this case) . . . it is not a part of the criminal proceeding that is extinguished by abatement ab initio. . . . . Id. at *4.
“There is also heft to the argument that
enforcing Robertson's CJA reimbursement order comports with the principle of finality.
. . . [O]nly non-final matters . . . are abated because a defendant's death
prevents the proceeding from reaching a conclusion. . . . Here, Robertson did
not challenge this court's affirmance of the CJA reimbursement order when he
sought certiorari . . . . Accordingly, the affirmed CJA reimbursement order is
a final order not subject to abatement.” Id.
at *5 (internal quotations and citations omitted).
One factor in this outcome appears to be that Robertson did not challenge the CJA contribution in his cert. petition. See id. at *5. Query whether there might be an exception to this new rule if the parties had kept the CJA contribution issue alive.
How to Use: To get to this new rule, the Ninth first rejected the widow’s challenge to the district court’s subject matter jurisdiction. Id. at *3. Along the way, it repeats some black letter law often helpful to the defense: “[I]t is familiar law that a federal court always has jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction.” United States v. Ruiz, 536 U.S. 622, 628 . . . (2002). Look to Robertson for a recent cite on the “j/x for its own j/x” proposition (particularly helpful when the Ninth is determining the legality of a sentence on appeal).
For Further Reading: Last week NorCal lost one of its legendary leaders: investigator Raymond McGrath. Raymond worked on the historic Irish extradition cases in the ‘80s, helping to defeat extradition orders and ultimately challenge the special terrorist courts of Northern Ireland. See article here; see also article here.
Mr. Raymond McGrath |
Raymond was inspired to professionalize investigations in human rights cases. He founded the Institute for International Criminal Investigations, which has trained over 200 people from 48 nationalities in the Hague. See article here.
Raymond passed away after a brave, quarter-century
battle with cancer. His courage and passion continues to inspire us all.
Image of “ab initio” from https://datainnovationsummit.com/abinitio/
Image
of Mr. Raymond McGrath from https://encore.org/purpose-prize/raymond-mcgrath/
Steven Kalar, Federal
Public Defender N.D. Cal. Website at www.ndcalfpd.org
.
Labels: CJA, Jurisdiction, Visiting Judges
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home