Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-00814/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-00814-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 540
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Mandamus and Other
Cause of Action: 28:2241fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)

---

1 

19cv00814 JAH-RBB 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

FELIPE GUTIERREZ-CHIC, 

Petitioner,

v. 

WILLIAM P. BARR, et. al. 

Respondents.

 Case No.: 19cv00814 JAH-RBB 

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR 

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS 

 Pending before the Court is Petitioner Felipe Gutierrez-Chic’s petition for writ of 

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 2241. For the reasons set forth below, the 

Court DENIES the petition. 

BACKGROUND

 Petitioner was arrested on January 26, 2019 pursuant to an out of district complaint 

from the Western District of Texas. Upon Petitioner’s request, the jurisdiction was 

transferred to the Southern District of California. Thereafter, Petitioner filed a motion to 

dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and the government filed a motion to return jurisdiction of 

supervised release. On April 29, 2019, after hearing oral argument on the motions, this 

Court denied the motion to dismiss and granted the government’s motion to return 

Case 3:19-cv-00814-JAH-RBB Document 8 Filed 05/24/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
2 

19cv00814 JAH-RBB 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

jurisdiction. On May 2, 2019, Petitioner filed the instant petition. Respondent filed a 

response on May 16, 2019 and Petitioner filed a traverse on May 21, 2019. 

DISCUSSION

 Petitioner argues he is being detained despite not having been arrested on a valid 

warrant and seeks an order releasing him from custody and staying any removal order that 

may issues. He contends three years of probation commenced in the Western District of 

Texas on November 25, 2015 and, accordingly, expired on November 25, 2018. He 

maintains the United States Marshal Service has no statutory authority to make a 

warrantless arrest of a suspected violator of probation and the purported warrant upon 

which he was arrested is not a warrant because it was not issued on the basis of a sworn 

oath or affirmation. Petitioner argues no court has jurisdiction to do anything but dismiss 

the petition because no valid warrant was issued before the expiration of probation. 

 Respondent maintains there is no oath or affirmation requirement in the federal 

statute that confers the authority to issue probation and supervised release warrants, and 

the Fifth Circuit, the controlling law, declined to read an oath or affirmation requirement 

in the statute. Respondent argues the United States Marshal Service effectuated service of 

the warrant validly issued by a district court in the Fifth Circuit. Respondent contends 

Petitioner relies on the conflict between Ninth Circuit and Fifth Circuit law and his “act of 

shopping his probation to this jurisdiction” raises highly problematic questions. 

Respondent argues the request for relief should be denied. Response at 4. 

 In his traverse, Petitioner argues the district court was bound by Ninth Circuit 

precedent and was required to dismiss the case once the insufficiency of the warrant was 

discovered. He further maintains he did not engage in “shopping” but, instead, did what 

he could to ensure communication with his daughter was not interrupted.1

                                               

1

 The Court notes, as Gutierrez-Chic well knew, that the purported reason for the request to transfer, i.e. 

for communication with his daughter who was separated from him at the time of arrest, was no longer an 

issue as his daughter was released from custody to a sponsoring relative in the state of Florida before he 

filed his motion to dismiss in United States v. Gutierrez-Chic, 19cv7050 JAH (S.D.Cal. 2019). 

Case 3:19-cv-00814-JAH-RBB Document 8 Filed 05/24/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
3 

19cv00814 JAH-RBB 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 As discussed in depth in United States v. Gutierrez-Chic, 19cv7050, the conflict 

between Fifth Circuit and Ninth Circuit law is problematic in this matter where the Western 

District of Texas issued a valid warrant under Fifth Circuit law and there is no Ninth Circuit 

authority instructing courts how to proceed when a case is transferred from a jurisdiction 

in which the warrant was validly issued. The Court adopts, in full, its reasoning and 

findings regarding Petitioner’s motion to dismiss in United States v. Guiterrez-Chic. The 

Court finds no authority supporting Petitioner’s request for release under the facts of this 

case.2

 Accordingly, for the above reasons and reasons state on the record in United States 

v. Gutierrez-Chic, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED the petition for writ of habeas corpus is 

DENIED. 

DATED: May 24, 2019 

 

 _________________________________ 

 JOHN A. HOUSTON 

 United States District Judge 

                                               

2

 The particular and strained circumstances here involve Petitioner initiating a transfer to this Court for 

the sole purpose of circumventing Fifth Circuit law to his advantage and, while doing so, misleading the 

United States Probation Office through his failure to advise the probation officer of his true intent and 

the differences in case law between the Fifth Circuit and the Ninth Circuit to accomplish the deceitful 

purpose of intentionally constructing a favorable outcome of his case. 

Case 3:19-cv-00814-JAH-RBB Document 8 Filed 05/24/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3