United States District Court, C.D. California
IN THE MATTER OF THE EXTRADITION OF FABIAN JALILVAND TEHRANI, A Fugitive from the Government of Germany.
M. DECKER United States Attorney LAWRENCE S. MIDDLETON
Assistant United States Attorney, DENNISE D. WILLETT
Assistant United States Attorney GREGORY S. SCALLY (Cal. Bar
No. 268073) Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for
Plaintiff UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
HONORABLE ROZELLA A. OLIVER, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
extraditee, FABIAN JALILVAND TEHRANI ("TEHRANI"),
was arrested on June 2, 2016 pursuant to a complaint and
warrant issued by the Honorable Karen E. Scott, United States
Magistrate Judge, seeking TEHRANI's extradition to
Germany, pursuant to an extradition treaty between Germany
and the United States, and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3184 et
seq. Judge Scott signed the warrant for arrest for
extradition on May 17, 2016. TEHRANI appeared before this
Court on June 2, 2016. At that time the government submitted
a brief requesting detention. At the request of counsel for
TEHRANI, the matter was set for a detention hearing on June
to the detention hearing, counsel for TEHRANI submitted a
brief in opposition to the government's request for
detention pending extradition proceedings, requesting bail in
the amount of a $100, 000 bond, with $25, 000 justified by
cash, arguing that TEHRANI neither poses a flight risk nor
poses a risk of danger to the community, and that special
circumstances exist warranting bail. The government also
submitted a brief prior to the detention hearing, arguing
that TEHRANI poses a flight risk and that no special
circumstances exist warranting bail. The Court has reviewed
all the written submissions. At the hearing the Court heard
from counsel for TEHRANI and the government. The Court has
also considered the initial and updated Pretrial Services
federal statute governing extradition procedures in the
United States pursuant to treaties with other nations, 18
U.S.C. §§ 3184 et seq., does not provide
for bail. Consequently, the Bail Reform Act, Title 18 U.S.C.
§§ 3141 et seq., and its criteria
governing the allowance and the amount of bail in United
States criminal cases do not apply in extradition matters.
Kamrin v. United States, 725 F.2d 1225, 1227-28 (9th
Cir. 1984). It is well-settled that a presumption against
bail governs in an international extradition proceeding, and
only "special circumstances" can justify release on
bail. In re Extradition of Kirby, 106 F.3d 855, 858
(9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Wright v. Henkel, 190 U.S.
40, 63 (1903)); see also Salerno v. United States,
878 F.2d 317, 318 (9th Cir. 1989). This presumption
"exists due to the foreign relations interest of the
United States in successfully returning persons subject to
criminal prosecution to the requesting country." In
re Extradition of Nacif-Borge, 829 F.Supp. 1210, 1215
(D. Nev. 1993).
extraditee must demonstrate both that he is not a flight risk
and that there are special circumstances warranting bail.
See Salerno, 878 F.2d at 318; In re Extradition
of Santos, 473 F.Supp.2d 1030, 1035-36 (C.D. Cal. 2006);
United States v. Ramnath, 533 F.Supp.2d 662, 665
(E.D. Tex. 2008); In re Extradition of Molnar, 182
F.Supp.2d 682, 687 (N.D. Ill. 2002); In re Extradition of
Nacif-Borge, 829 F.Supp. at 1215; In re Extradition
of Chapman, 459 F.Supp.2d 1024, 1026-27 (D. Hawai'i
2006). The Court finds that TEHRANI has not successfully met
his burden as to either prong.
risk of flight, TEHRANI has demonstrable ties to no less than
five countries. Though he has lived in the Los Angeles area
for some time, the timing of his departure from Germany in
the aftermath of the execution of a search warrant at his
residence there, coupled with his wide geographic ties,
establishes his flight risk. TEHRANI's showing has not
adequately demonstrated otherwise.
has he demonstrated special circumstances. The Ninth Circuit
has stated that issues common to all incarcerated defendants
do not qualify as "special circumstances." In
re Extradition of Smyth, 976 F.2d 1535, 1535-36 (9th
Cir. 1992). Regarding anticipated delay, TEHRANI has not
shown circumstances that are different from "factors
applicable to all defendants facing extradition." In
re Extradition of Mainero, 950 F.Supp. 290, 294 (S.D.
Cal. 1996). Accordingly, the anticipated delay in extradition
proceedings is not a special circumstance warranting bail in
claim of substantial delay by Germany also does not rise to
the level of a special circumstance warranting bail. The
Court finds that the timeline laid out in the
government's brief, as supported by the exhibits thereto,
does not support the inference that Germany chose not to make
the extradition of the TEHRANI a priority, and finds no case
law suggesting that any of the delays cited by TEHRANI in
this case would constitute a special circumstance warranting
bail. To the contrary, the case law supports the finding that
no delay here warrants bail. See, e.g.,
Extradition of Drumm, ___ F.Supp.3d ___, 2015 WL
8492037, at *4 (D.Mass. 2015); Extradition of
Drayer, 190 F.3d 410, 415 (6th Cir. 1999); Martin v.
Warden, 993 F.2d 824, 830 (11th Cir. 1993).
reasons set forth above, and the reasons mentioned by the
Court on the record, the Court finds that TEHRANI's
release on bail will pose an unacceptable risk of flight in
the context of an extradition proceeding, and that TEHRANI
has not demonstrated special circumstances warranting bail.
THEREFORE ORDERED that TEHRANI be detained during the
pendency of extradition proceedings.
FURTHER ORDERED that TEHRANI be committed to the custody of
the Attorney General for confinement in a corrections
facility separate, to the extent practicable, from persons
awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody
FURTHER ORDERED that TEHRANI be afforded reasonable
opportunity for private consultation with counsel.
FURTHER ORDERED that on order of a Court of the United States
or on request of any attorney for the government, the person
in charge of the corrections facility in which TEHRANI is
confined deliver TEHRANI to a United States Marshal for ...