Harris v. United States, Case No. 2:16-CV-06169-CAS

YONGDA HUANG HARRIS, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

Case No. 2:16-CV-06169-CAS

Case No. 2:16-CV-05606-CAS

Case No. 2:12-CR-01085-CAS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

August 14, 2019

ORDER

PETITIONER'S MOTIONS FOR RETURN OF PROPERTY (Case No. 2:16-CV-6169-CAS, Dkt. 1, filed August 15, 2016); (Case No. 2:16-CV-5606-CAS, Dkt. 46, filed May 13, 2019); (Case No. 2:12-CR-01085-CAS, Dkt. 192, filed May 13, 2019)

PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF ALL ATTORNEYS' FEES (Case No. 2:16-CV-6169-CAS, Dkt. 22, filed December 20, 2018)

PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR COURT TO ORDER THE RETURN OF ALL MONIES RELATED TO CONVICTION AND DESTRUCTION OF ALL

EVIDENCE SEIZED BY THE GOVERNMENT (Case No. 2:16-CV-6169-CAS, Dkt. 23, filed December 20, 2018)

MOTION TO ORDER BOSTON FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT ET AL. TO EXPUNGE DEFENDANT'S CONVICTION (2:12-CR-01085-CAS, Dkt. 190, filed May 13, 2019)

I. INTRODUCTION

On October 5, 2012, petitioner Yongda Huang Harris was arrested at Los Angeles International Airport ("LAX") by a United States Customs and Border Protection ("CBP") agent for willfully delivering hazardous material to an air carrier in violation of 49 U.S.C. § 46502(a)(1)(B). Case No. 2:16-CV-5606-CAS, Dkt. 31 ("Habeas Order") at 2. Pursuant to his arrest, and in connection with the charges it planned to bring against Harris, the government seized Harris's luggage (the "property"). Id. at 3. On November 8, 2012, a grand jury indicted Harris for "knowingly and willfully making material false, fictitious, and fraudulent statements on a customs declaration form" in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001. Case No. 12-CR-01085, Dkt. 18 ("Indictment"). Harris pled guilty on December 17, 2012. Id., Dkt. 28.

On June 10, 2013, Harris appealed, challenging both his conviction and his sentence. Case No. 12-CR-01085, Dkt. 86. The Ninth Circuit affirmed both the conviction and the sentence on August 5, 2015. See United States v. Harris, 611 Fed. Appx. 480, 481 (9th Cir. 2015).

On July 27, 2016, Harris filed a motion to vacate his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 2255. Case No. 16-CV-05606, Dkt. 1. On August 15, 2016, Harris filed a new case seeking the return of his property. Case No. 16-CV-06169, Dkt. 1 ("Prop. Mot."). On October 14, 2016, the Court consolidated the cases and stayed proceedings relating to themotion for return of property. Case No. 16-CV-06169, Dkt. 7; Case No. 16-CV-05606, Dkt. 11. The Court granted Harris's petition for relief on August 9, 2017, Case No. 16-CV-5606, Dkt. 31, and subsequently granted the government's application to dismiss the indictment against Harris, Case No. 12-CR-1085, Dkt. 183.

On October 24, 2018, the Court issued a minute order setting a briefing schedule on Harris's motion for return of property. Case No. 16-CV-06169, Dkt. 14. On November 26, 2018, the government filed its opposition. Id. Dkt. 15 ("Opp'n"). On December 20, 2018, Harris filed: (1) a reply to the opposition, id.; (2) a motion for reimbursement of all attorneys' fees under 18 U.S.C. § 3306, id., dkt. 23 ("Atty. Fees Mot."); (3) a motion for "the Court to order return of all monies taken from petitioner as a consequence of his 18 U.S.C. § 1001 conviction and return or destruction of all evidence the government has pursuant to a recent seizure of alleged confidential communications," id., dkt. 23 ("Seizure Mot.").

On January 18, 2019, the government filed a supplemental brief addressing the latter two motions. Id. Dkt. 25 ("Supp. Brief"). On May 13, 2019, Harris filed two additional motions regarding the return of his property, Case No. 2:16-CV-5606-CAS, Dkt. 46; Case No. 2:12-CR-01085-CAS, Dkt. 192, and a motion to "order Boston Federal Court, U.S. District Court, Boston Federal Probation, U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services, FBI, Dept. of Justice, US Bureau of Prisons, and all other relevant agencies to expunge all criminal records and conviction of defendant," Case No. 2:12-CR-01085-CAS, Dkt. 190 ("Exp. Mot.").

On June 3, 2019, the Court requested an in camera submission from the government explaining with more specificity the reasons why it still required possession of Harris's property. No. 16-CV-06169, Dkt. 26 ("Prop. Order"). The government submitted its in camera brief on July 10, 2019. Case No. 2:16-CV-06169-CAS, Dkt. 35.

On June 17, 2019, Harris filed (1) a motion "objecting to the Court's order for an in camera proceeding and for the Court to order the government to reveal its criminal charges and investigation" against Harris, Case No. 2:16-CV-06169-CAS, Dkt. 30; and(2) a motion for "ex-parte status for exhibit 1 and a motion for the court to order email correspondence for all future communications between court and plaintiff," Case No. 2:16-CV-06169-CAS, Dkt. 29. Harris withdrew these two motions on July 22, 2019. Id., Dkts. 37, 38.

II. BACKGROUND

On October 5, 2012, Harris arrived at LAX on a flight from Japan. Habeas Order at 2. A CBP agent requested a secondary screening of Harris and his luggage because Harris appeared to be wearing body armor under a trench coat. Id. Upon inspecting Harris's luggage, the agent found various weapons including a smoke grenade, lead-filled billy clubs, a baton, a bone saw, a hatchet, and an ice pick. Id. at 2. Customs agents also found two body bags, a gas mask, a fully-body biohazard suit, three black full-face ski masks, several different types of gloves, a blindfold, a white S&M style mask with zippers over the eyes and mouth, a false beard and adhesive, binoculars, knives, metal handcuffs, a small digital video recorder, a pair of wire cutters, three pairs of scissors, and an electronic device to repel dogs. Id.

Agents also searched Harris's laptop and found Japanese anime graphically depicting the rape, molestation, and sexual torture of children and a live action movie titled "Girls in Cement" containing footage of the kidnapping, gang rape, mutilation, sexual torture, and murder of girls. Id. at 3. They also found publications that provided instructions on how to "hunt and trap humans," information regarding Rohypnol and other date-rape drugs, cover letters to various schools in Japan seeking employment, a document containing the schedules for schools in Japan noting the times at which children arrived and left each school, and a list of vacant plots of land in proximity to those schools. Id.

Based on their belief that the smoke grenade in Harris's checked luggage was likely hazardous, agents arrested Harris on charges of willfully delivering hazardous material to an air carrier in violation of 49 U.S.C. § 46502(a)(1)(B). Id.

On November 8, 2012, a grand jury indicted Harris for "knowingly and willfully[making] material false, fictitious, and fraudulent statements on a customs declaration form" in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001. Id. Specifically, the indictment charged that petitioner falsely identified China as the only country that he had visited on this trip prior to arrival in the United States and that he falsely represented the "total value of all goods purchased or acquired abroad" to be only $100. Id. On December 10, 2010, Harris signed a plea agreement which stated that he knowingly and willfully made the false statements to CBP, pursuant to which the government agreed to recommend that Harris be sentenced to five years of probation. Id. at 4. On August 9, 2017, the Court overturned Harris's conviction and vacated his sentence because Harris's attorneys did not properly advise him or the elements of the crime to which he admitted. Id. at 19.

III. MOTION FOR RETURN OF PROPERTY

Harris seeks the return of the property that was seized from him at LAX, arguing that the government's seizure of his property and refusal to return it to him is unlawful and constitutes a "violation of his and his family's constitutional rights," because (1) the property belonged to his mother and "other people," and (2) he was coerced into signing the plea deal, so he did not "waive his right to the property" by signing it. Prop. Mot. at 1. The government argues that it has the right to keep Harris's property because it was obtained pursuant to a lawful arrest and because "the seized items are important evidence to the potential new charges it is investigating" against Harris. Opp'n at 5. The government's in camera brief details the new charges it is investigating against Harris and the reasons why the seized property is relevant to those charges.

Rule 41(g) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that "[a] person aggrieved . . . by the deprivation of property may move for the property's return." Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g). "When a motion for return of property is made before an indictment is filed (but a criminal investigation is pending), the movant bears the burden of proving both that the [property's] seizure was illegal and that he or she is entitled to lawful possession of the property." United States v. Martinson, 809 F.2d 1364, 1369 (9th Cir.1987) (citations omitted). But when "the property in question is no longer needed forevidentiary purposes, either because trial is complete, the defendant has pleaded guilty, or . . . the government has abandoned its investigation," a defendant "is presumed to have a right to [the property's] return[.]" Id. At this point, "the government has the burden of demonstrating that it has a legitimate reason to retain the property." Id.; see also United States v. Gladding, 775 F.3d 1149, 1152 (9th Cir. 2014).

The Court is satisfied by the government's representations in its in camera brief that the seized property is relevant to its ongoing investigation of potential new charges against Harris. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Harris's motions for return of his property.

IV. MOTION FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF ALL ATTORNEYS' FEES

Harris seeks the reimbursement of attorneys' fees pursuant to the Hyde Amendment, 18 U.S.C. § 3306. Atty. Fees Mot. at 1. Harris contends that the government's "vile and deplorable" conduct rendered it liable for...