should not be afforded an unnecessary and what appears to be a truly unprecedented restriction for a misdemeanor is clave and says well judge prescott hasn't shined in on whether or not this is a misdemeanor or felony but that's pure speculation and implausible there's nothing on the record that says that she considers it a felony and it makes no sense that judge prescott would ignore a misc levens view of the case that having been arranged for by judge kaplan judge prescot that is that she would permit a jury as opposed to herself to review judge kaplan's charges of contempt how is a condition of release reasonable when based on speculation that is just implausible under the circumstances of this case what are the restraints that mr don tickers under right now the precise i want to make sure i understand precisely what restraints he's under now i understand he's walking his child to school daily he has he's on home confinement is that right and he's not supposed to leave the jurisdiction he's electronic items and i suppose one might think well he's not in prison so why see complaining and here's why he's complaining because it's a restriction because it's unnecessary because he's already been on home confinement twice as long for the house arrest that was imposed in the only case that we can find where an attorney in the circuit was found guilty of criminal contempt the statu bail reform act requires that the restriction be reasonable and under these circumstances you have it you have someone who after the charges was in canada came here to the courthouse across the street he contacted magistrate larry berger and said you know we have this civil contempt hearing scheduled for next week let's put that off because of this new criminal charge he filed to brief in this court of pro se appeal that's being argued on march th which is his appeal from the civil contempt on which the criminal contempt is based and since the criminal charge he's appeared at his disciplinary hearing for four days and testified what's the schedule for the criminal proceedings now criminal trial is now scheduled and twenty so by that time judge carney he will have been on home confinement for eleven months i agree it's not as bad as being in prison but the bell reform act requires that we impose reasonable restrictions and he still has failed to produce documents that the judge required him to produce is that right there is a so called forensic protocol that requires that he turn over certain documents we have secure those we have images of the devices and those are secure our view is that under the law he does not have to turn those over because it contains privileged and constitutionally protected materials on pain of contempt one hundred need not do that that's right and he has not turned  over pending the criminal trial before judge prescott on my advice having made sure that we have secured the advice is having image them and keeping them secure but that's the merits of the criminal case for twenty seven years he's been these issues and he's been litigating the issues of contempt for a year and a half one of the footnotes in the reply papers list just some of the submissions he's made pro se litigating a case appearing at a disciplinary hearing showing up filing a pro se brief these are the opposite of flight so you're saying that no restraint should be imposed is that right well i would that would be my dream request that no restriction that it be released on recognizance but here you have the pretrial services officer who is in direct almost daily contact with him telling judge presby you know what this is a voluntary on the pretrial services officer all we really need here most is monitored curfew so to the extent that i'm an advocate miss glavan is an advocate and we look at things from the point of view or our respective and gender is your pretrial service it's an independent agency telling judge press you know i've observed this guy day in and day out for the past however many months i understand his slavens arguments about why he's why there's a concern here but judge press that you should put him on a monitored curfew that's all that's necessary so the answer your question is if this were the arraignment i'd be as as officer harman explains it to the court and explains it to me what a monitored curfew is is that he remains on the bracelet or the anklet but he's free to be at liberty except he has to report i don't remember the exact times of day that she told us but it's in the record i believe it's he has to be home by eight or ten o'clock and can go out the next morning to walk his son to school but he remains under that view he remains on the bracelet or of the english as a as as the case maybe  to have the liberty to go about his daily activities to look for work to seek employment to do the work he's permitted to do with regard to the enforcement of the ecuadorian judgment outside the united states in which he working at the time of arraignment but it's not his burden necessarily judge walker to explain why he should have not have this restriction it's up to the government in this case ms glavan to argue why he should have the restriction and why the restriction and why the any restriction should be reasonable and it seems to me that pretrial services at the most the monitored curfew was all that could arguably be necessary under these circumstances i thank you very much we'll hear from the government the appropriate bail conditions because i november th when judge prescott found that mr doniger posed a risk of flight and should remain on home detention with electronic monitoring she did not commit clear error or any error this court reviews it just records determination regarding bail conditions for clear air because the district court's determination is based largely on predicate factual findings and it carved out on the home detention condition that mr johns agreed be allowed to leave the home so he could fulfill family obligations so he is allowed to leave the home for purposes of employment for purposes of attorney visit for purposes of religious reasons and for purposes of family obligations or other activities that have to be improved in advance by pretrial services just as he chases under school every day which is approximately a mile away from his apartment he walks in there what are we to make of the recommendation for home detention with electronic monitoring on august th we then were back in front of judge prescott on november th because the pretrial services officer as i understand it where a defendant has been compliant with their conditions will look to eliminate home detention in favor of a curfew which is what happened here that it's not unusual for that to happen and if a defendant has been compliant for pretrial to to make that recommendation however my understanding as well and this is reflected in my november st letter to judge pre trial services as well does not purport to know all of the underlying facts and evidence in the case it's that pretrial services was satisfied with mr johnson condition and how he's been compliant for three months as of that period of time in november so your honor with respect to the risk two years starting with he was directed to provide certain documents as of june th of twenty this conflict it does get your honor i believe it does go to the  you know doing a bad event and being before the court respect a fur court orders goes to whether or not you will comply with your conditions whether you're concerned about leaving the country to face the charges  be used against him i actually want to separate that out your honor with respect to the documents that he has been ordered to turn over the constitutional argument that mr johnson are raised with respect to those documents  amendment argument judge kaplan repeatedly rejected that argument there was no request for a stay pending appeal mr johnson or just didn't turn them over in to this day it's not just not turning over pending before this court and the underlying civil case there is an appeal of the money judgment that judge kaplan issued an order directing taxation of costs after the contempt claims by chevron that was appealed from fully briefed and is pending before the circuit and then the rd appeal is from judge kaplan's may  and nineteen findings of civil contempt which is also pending before this court and i believe argument is currently scheduled for next month on those appeals but with respect to a number of the issues below not turning over documents it would be the government's position that mr don's or has waived any right to challenge that for instance with respect to the order that he turned over his computers for and nineteen judge kaplan found mr doniger in civil contempt for failure to provide a list of his devices and turn them over mr johnson or in his brief challenging the civil contempt did not challenge those civil contempt findings and judge parker if i could get back to your point on the risk of flight what i think was particularly important in the district court's finding on risk of flight is mr don's acres unique and longstanding ties to ecuador for which i don't think the parties disagree does not have a reliable extradition process and the ties to ecuador are deep they are to high level officials and community leaders there and it's been long standing i think absent those ties and strong ties to ecuador the bail conditions may have been different thank you very much thank you thank you i think we have the arguments will try to get to a decision pro