Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lewis v. Callahan

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Tacoma

April 6, 2018

JOHN ANTHONY LEWIS, Petitioner,
v.
CHARLES CALLAHAN, et al., Respondents.

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          J. Richard Creatura United States Magistrate Judge

         The District Court has referred this petition for a writ of habeas corpus to United States Magistrate Judge J. Richard Creatura. The Court's authority for the referral is 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B), and local Magistrate Judge Rules MJR3 and MJR4. Petitioner John Anthony Lewis filed the petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

         Petitioner is a California prisoner challenging future incarceration in Washington based on a Washington conviction. He alleges that his rights were violated when he did not receive a final disposition for his Washington convictions within 180 days of requesting it under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (“IAD”), 18 U.S.C. § 2 and RCW 9.100.010.[1] However, petitioner was convicted on a guilty plea that explicitly waived his right to speedy trial. Further, the IAD allows for extensions beyond the 180 days when the trial court finds good cause, and the trial court did so here. Therefore, petitioner's habeas petition is without merit and the Court recommends that his habeas petition be denied.

         PETITIONER'S CLAIMS IN THIS HABEAS PETITION

         1. Petitioner was not provided a speedy trial under the IAD, codified in Washington under RCW 9.100.010.

         2. Petitioner was brought to trial outside the 180 days provided for under the IAD, rendering his conviction out of Lewis County unlawful.

         3. Petitioner was denied his right to appeal from the Lewis County conviction.

         BASIS FOR CUSTODY AND FACTS

         Petitioner was convicted of a crime in California and is currently serving his sentence there in the Correctional Training Facility. While incarcerated in California, he was charged with several crimes in Lewis County, Washington, and ultimately pled guilty to one count of first-degree theft, one count of second-degree identity theft, and bail- jumping. Dkt. 18, Ex. 21. He challenges his future incarceration for the Washington crimes.

         Plaintiff was originally charged in Lewis County with theft in the first degree, trafficking of stolen property, and possession of a controlled substance. Dkt. 18, Ex. 2. The state later amended the charge to include two counts of identity theft in the second degree and bail jumping. Id., Ex. 6. At this time, petitioner was serving a sentence in California for a California crime. Id., Ex. 1. The state therefore began proceedings under the IAD to bring petitioner temporarily to Washington to stand trial. See id., Ex. 7.

         After being notified he would be temporarily taken to Washington, petitioner filed an IAD form invoking his right to have the final disposition of the case determined within 180 days after receipt of the form by the prosecutor and trial court. Id., Ex. 7 at 3. Petitioner signed this form on February 4, 2015, and the state received it on February 18, 2015. Id., Ex. 8 at 2. However, in July of 2015, the state filed a motion to extend the deadline, explaining that the prosecutor was having difficulty contacting the California Department of Correction, that the deadline was fast approaching, and that the California officials had moved petitioner to a different prison, requiring the filing of amended paperwork. Id., Ex. 8. The trial court found California had not acted in good faith, made a finding of good cause for the extension, and granted an extension to November 15, 2015. Id., Ex. 9. Petitioner was subsequently transported to Washington on October 13, 2015. Id., Ex. 11.

         Petitioner's counsel then filed a motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, grant an extension, stating that he required additional time to familiarize himself with the case and to effectively represent his client. Id., Ex. 12. The Court again found good cause and granted an extension to January 31, 2016. Id., Ex. 14. The state later requested a final extension due to the unavailability of material witnesses. Id., Ex. 19. Again, the Court found good cause and granted the extension to April 13, 2016. Id., Ex. 20.

         Petitioner subsequently pled guilty to theft in the first degree, one count of identity theft in the second degree, and bail jumping. Id., Ex. 21. His guilty plea recitation included an explicit waiver of his right to a speedy trial. Id. at 2. The Court entered an exceptional sentence, taking into account the fact that petitioner was already serving time in California, and sentenced petitioner to 24 months for each offense to be served concurrently after the completion of his California imprisonment. Id., Ex. 22. Petitioner was then returned to California where he remains in custody. Id., Ex. 23

         PROCEDURAL ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.