Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California remanded a California criminal prosecution to Solano County Superior Court. The court held that Susan Brashear Anthony’s notice of removal was untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 1455(b)(1) and failed to establish a valid basis for federal removal under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442, 1442a, or 1443.
Holdings
- A notice of removal of a state criminal prosecution filed more than thirty days after arraignment is untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 1455(b)(1), absent an adequately established basis for an extension.
- A defendant removing a state criminal prosecution must include all grounds for removal in the notice and must establish a legitimate statutory basis for federal jurisdiction.
- Allegations of civil-rights violations, federal preemption, Fourth Amendment violations, or due-process violations do not by themselves authorize removal of a state criminal prosecution under the federal criminal-removal statutes.
Questions Presented
- Whether Anthony's notice of removal was timely under 28 U.S.C. § 1455(b)(1).
- Whether Anthony established a legitimate statutory ground for removal of the state criminal prosecution under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442, 1442a, or 1443.
- Whether alleged civil-rights, disability, privacy, preemption, and due-process violations established a basis for federal removal.
Disposition
remanded
Cases Cited (5)
- Hawaii ex rel. Louie v. HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A., 761 F.3d 1027, 1034 (9th Cir. 2014)(followed)
- Luther v. Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP, 533 F.3d 1031, 1034 (9th Cir. 2008)(followed)
- People of State of Cal. v. Sandoval, 434 F.2d 635, 636 (9th Cir. 1970)(followed)
- State of Georgia v. Rachel, 86 S. Ct. 1783, 1791-1797 (1966)(followed)
- City of Greenwood, Miss. v. Peacock, 86 S. Ct. 1800, 1812-1813 (1966)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…