Levin

Levin v. Coleman

Good Law
79 F. App'x 308
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 23, 2003No. 02-35967; D.C. No. CV-01-01298-RSLCalifornia634 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*309 MEMORANDUM **

Alexandr Yefimovich Levin appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for attorney’s fees under 28 U.S.C. § 2412 , the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), even though Levin prevailed on his habeas petition seeking relief from deportation because he was not convicted of an aggravated felony. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion the district court’s decision to deny attorney’s fees. Gutierrez v. Barnhart, 274 F.3d 1255, 1258 (9th Cir.2001). The district court abuses its discretion if it bases its decision on an erroneous legal conclusion or a clearly erroneous finding of fact. See Andrew v. Bowen, 837 F.2d 875, 877 (9th Cir.1988). We reverse and remand.

The EAJA mandates the award of attorney’s fees and expenses to the prevailing party unless the court finds that the position of the United States was substantially justified or that special circumstances make an award unjust. See Oregon Natural Resources Council v. Madigan, 980 F.2d 1330, 1331 (9th Cir.1992). The government must show that its position has a reasonable basis in law and fact to prove that its position was substantially justified. See id. The…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.