Ronney Lee Snyder v. George Sumner

dissenting:

I cannot agree with the premature and broad-brush treatment of the “IADA-pa-role” issue in the majority opinion, which comes dangerously close to overruling United States v. Black, 609 F.2d 1330 (9th Cir.1979).

Disposition of this case at this juncture does not require us to reach and “decide” the issue of the relationship between the IADA and a grant of parole by the sending jurisdiction. In my view, we should remand to the district court for an evidentia-ry hearing on the third continuance of 90 days to determine whether any or all of that time was excludable; the number of excludable days was, after all, the core issue for both Snyder and the State. If the district court on remand were to find after a hearing that the time was excludable and Snyder was held in Nevada’s custody pretrial for only 112 days attributable to the State, this conclusion would foreclose Snyder’s claim that the 120-day maximum period prescribed by the IADA was exceeded. It would be unnecessary for us to consider the correctness of the district court’s conclusion that the grant of parole voided the IADA 120-day requirement. If the district court were to find the 90 days were not excludable…

Pursuant to a detainer filed under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act *1450 (“IADA”), 18 U.S.C. app. II, § 1 et seq. (1988); Nev.Rev.Stat. § 178.620 (1991) [all following cites will be to the United States Code only], Ronnie Lee Snyder (“Snyder”) was released from an Iowa prison to Nevada to stand trial on criminal charges. He was held in Nevada for 426 days before his trial began. In this appeal from a denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, Snyder asserts his right under the IADA to have been brought to trial within 120 days of his arrival in Nevada. Nevada claims— as it did successfully in district court — that because Snyder was formally paroled by Iowa on the 120th day after his arrival in Nevada, the IADA requirements do not apply. In the alternative, the state argues that even if the IADA rules did apply, only 112 days of Snyder’s 426 day incarceration in Nevada pending trial would be attributable to the state; thus bringing him to trial within the statutory limit. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (1988), and we reverse and remand.

I

Facts and Procedure

Based on pending felony charges, Nevada filed a notice of detainer against Snyder while…

960 F.2d 1448 Ronney Lee SNYDER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. George SUMNER, et al., Respondent-Appellee. No. 90-16335. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Oct. 9, 1991. Decided April 3, 1992. James E. Mayberry, Las Vegas, Nev., for petitioner-appellant. Robert Wieland, Deputy Atty. Gen., Carson City, Nev., for respondent-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada. Before: TANG and TROTT, Circuit Judges, and BURNS, * District Judge. TROTT, Circuit Judge: 1 Pursuant to a detainer filed under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act ("IADA"), 18 U.S.C. app. II, § 1 et seq. (1988); Nev.Rev.Stat. § 178.620 (1991) [all following cites will be to the United States Code only], Ronnie Lee Snyder ("Snyder") was released from an Iowa prison to Nevada to stand trial on criminal charges. He was held in Nevada for 426 days before his trial began. In this appeal from a denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, Snyder asserts his right under the IADA to have been brought to trial within 120 days of his arrival in Nevada. Nevada claims--as it did successfully in district court--that because Snyder was formally…