United States v. Chanel Wiley

Good Law
103 F.4th 565
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 29, 202422-50235California9,682 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. The Ankle Monitor Federal agents arrested Wiley for trafficking a small amount of methamphetamine, and an indictment soon followed. Wiley was released on bond pending trial but struggled with pretrial supervision and eventually was arrested again. Rather than forfeit the bond (which would have cost her surety their family home), the magistrate judge ordered Wiley to wear an electronic ankle monitor “to make sure [she] show[ed] up for court . . . .” The monitor, which the judge described as “the size of a cell phone,” permitted Wiley to avoid detention and tracked her location at all times. Wiley wore her monitor as prescribed, including when she attended court hearings and at trial.

1 Wiley also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting her conviction. We address this claim in a concurrently filed memorandum disposition, in which we affirm.

USA V. WILEY

B. Jury Selection and Trial On the first day of trial, shortly before jury selection began, defense counsel told the district judge that the ankle monitor “keeps giving out audible alerts, and we’re afraid that would be prejudicial to the jury.” 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.