USA v. Samaniego

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
WO
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
United States of America,
Plaintiff,
v.
Jesus Samaniego,
Defendant.
No. CR-14-00439-001-TUC-JCH (JR)
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant Jesus Samaniego’s Motion to Quash (Doc. 56) and
Emergency Motion to Quash (Doc. 57). Defendant is currently serving a 228-month
sentence imposed by the Southern District of Indiana at FPC Montgomery. (Doc. 57 at 1.)
Defendant requests the Court quash his outstanding probation violation warrant/detainer in
this district, issued on April 10, 2019, stating that the active Arizona detainer is preventing
his transfer to community-based rehabilitation. (Id.) The Court ordered the Government to
answer to the motions. (Doc. 59.)
The Government responds in opposition, stating that Defendant “does not allege any
legal or procedural defects that would support quashing the arrest warrant and lifting the
detainer.” (Doc. 60 at 4.) The Court agrees. Supreme Court precedent establishes that a
person accused of a probation violation must receive a revocation hearing “within a
reasonable time” after the person is taken into custody for the violation. Moody v. Daggett,
429 U.S. 78, 86–87 (1976) (quoting Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 488 (1972)).
Defendant is not yet in custody for the probation violation. Accordingly, the Court will
Case 4:14-cr-00439-JCH-JR Document 61 Filed 05/04/26 Page 1 of 3

- 2 -
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
deny Defendant’s pending motions.
However, the Government recognized “that the pending arrest warrant and detainer
potentially are impeding the defendant’s prison classification and qualification for certain
rehabilitative programs and benefits like community placement or home confinement.”
(Doc. 60 at 5.) As such, the Government
asks the Court to set an initial appearance date for the defendant in the
District of Arizona, Tucson Division. The chosen hearing date should be
sufficiently set out to allow for the defendant’s transfer from out of state. The
United States recommends at least eight to twelve weeks to allow sufficient
time for the defendant’s transport into the District of Arizona. The United
States also recommends reappointment of Jose Robles, Esq. as defendant’s
counsel of record, to facilitate a timely resolution of this matter.
(Id. at 6.) The Court will accommodate this request.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED denying Defendant Jesus Samaniego’s Motion to Quash
(Doc. 56) and Emergency Motion to Quash (Doc. 57).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED reappointing CJA Jose Robles as defendant’s
counsel of record in this matter.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED scheduling an initial appearance on Defendant’s
second supervised release violation in this case for July 9, 2026, at 2:00 PM in front of
Magistrate Judge Lynette C. Kimmins.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael R.
Lizano to issue a writ securing Defendant Jesus Samaniego’s transport from FPC
Montgomery to the District of Arizona as soon as convenient for all involved and to ensure
his presence at the initial appearance.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Defendant is transported to this district in
advance of the initial appearance date, his counsel of record Jose Robles, Esq., may file a
motion to expedite the initial appearance as he deems proper.
. . . .
. . . .
Case 4:14-cr-00439-JCH-JR Document 61 Filed 05/04/26 Page 2 of 3

- 3 -
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
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED granting the Government’s motion to unseal the
January 27, 2016 Petition to Revoke Supervised Release (Doc. 60 at 2 n.1). The Clerk of
the Court shall unseal the Petition (Doc. 53) and Amended Petition (Doc. 55).
Dated this 30th day of April, 2026.
Case 4:14-cr-00439-JCH-JR Document 61 Filed 05/04/26 Page 3 of 3