Re: Defense in impossible position between ICE and criminal court

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

Apr 2, 2025 at 10:02:34 AM PDT, Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

 

More of the courtroom of the super-empathetic judge David Fleischer,
Harris County (Houstin), TX.

 

The defendant was put on bond. He's in ICE custody, which had issued a
detainer. He's in the country illegally and has been deported
previously.

 

It's not clear if he was already in ICE custody when bond was issued,
but it's clear that he's being held in ICE custody at the moment his
wife put up cash bail.

 

Defense is desperate to prevent bond from being revoked because, while
held by ICE, he's not complying with bond conditions especially the drug
and alchohol testing. State court has no way to compel ICE to bring him
to court. And in the back of everyone's one -- even if the procedure is
followed by which ICE is notified of state court actions -- ICE can take
the request to deport under advisement but can still decide to deport.

 

Of course they can. Immigration is a matter of federal jurisdiction. It
clearly supersedes any state law or court order. And this guy isn't just
your standard illegal. He's a prior deportee, which means he hasn't
just committed an administrative violation. He's committed a federal
felony. Add to that the fact that he has also apparently committed
additional crimes while he was here illegally (for the second time) and
there's no fucking way ICE should do anything other than deport his ass.

 
I'm not disagreeing with any of this. I'm just pointing out how
impossible the defense's position is, trying to prevent his client from
being put into the situation of bond violation and being unable to get
him into state court.

I wonder why he was given bond to begin with considering the strong
likelihood of deportation or maybe the judge wasn't allowed to consider
deportation in granting bond.
 

Once deported, or even if ICE won't bring him back to court, that's a
violation and bond is revoked.

 

He can't just be turned over to the sheriff because he's out on bond.
The sheriff holding him in custody violates the bond.

 

The sheriff can hold the defendant in custody for 48 hours to honor the
ICE detainer.

 

At one point defense tries to strongly suggest he will inform the
sheriff that the hold cannot last beyond 48 hours. The judge, without
showing temper, strongly suggests that defense, in zealously defending
his client, might be committing an ethical breach as somehow the
defendent, whom ICE sees as a flight risk, will be allowed back into the
community.

 

The judge wrestles out loud with his personal ethical obligation because
he's been forced into a position of creating some sort of indefinite
bond for the defendant, which is favoritism on behalf of this defendant
and something that he hasn't done on behalf of prior defendants.
However, he sees that he has no choice and issues a bench warrant
(hoping ICE will bring the defendant to court) and doesn't revoke bond.

 

ICE should politely but firmly tell the judge to stay in his lane and as
a courtesy give him the flight number and arrival time of the defendant's
plane to Caracas or El Salvador or wherever.

 
Let's be fair to the judge. Everyone in that hearing knew that the bench
warrant wasn't binding upon ICE. The judge also stated that the
defendant was obligated to follow the law including entering the United
States legally. And he warned the defense not to tell the sheriff he had
to release the defendant from custody if held for 48 hours on the ICE
detainer to prevent the defendant from fleeing from immigration.
 
I don't see what you can fault the judge on here.