18 U.S.C. § 3144
Release or detention of a material witness
If it appears from an affidavit filed by a party that the testimony of a person is material in a criminal proceeding, and if it is shown that it may become impracticable to secure the presence of the person by subpoena, a judicial officer may order the arrest of the person and treat the person in accordance with the provisions of section 3142 of this title. No material witness may be detained because of inability to comply with any condition of release if the testimony of such witness can adequately be secured by deposition, and if further detention is not necessary to prevent a failure of justice. Release of a material witness may be delayed for a reasonable period of time until the deposition of the witness can be taken pursuant to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 109
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1965–2025 · leading case: United States v. Osama Awadallah, 349 F.3d 42 (2d Cir. 2003).
United States v. Osama Awadallah, 349 F.3d 42 (2d Cir. 2003). “See 18 U.S.C. § 3144 . The district court *45 (Scheindlin, J.”
Al-Kidd v. Ashcroft, 580 F.3d 949 (9th Cir. 2009). “He alleges that he was arrested and confined because former United States Attorney General John Ashcroft (Ashcroft), subordinates operating under policies promulgated by Ashcroft, and others within the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), unlawfully used the federal…”
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426 (2004). “He ceased to be held under the authority of the criminal justice system, see 18 U. S. C. § 3144 , and began to be held under that of the military detention system.”
Higazy v. Templeton, 505 F.3d 161 (2d Cir. 2007). “See 18 U.S.C. § 3144 . Higazy later explained that he was worried about the effect this could have on his scholarship: "I remember amongst the things that I told the scholarships people, `I apologize.”
Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (2011). “Argued March 2, 2011—Decided May 31, 2011 Respondent al-Kidd alleges that, after the September 11th terrorist attacks, then-Attorney General Ashcroft authorized federal officials to detain terrorism suspects using the federal material-witness stat ute, 18 U. S. C. §3144 . He…”
J. Jesus Faustino Aguilar-Ayala v. Cecilio Ruiz, Etc., 973 F.2d 411 (5th Cir. 1992). “18 U.S.C. § 3144 provides for the detention of material witnesses in order to insure their presence at a criminal proceeding.”
United States v. Matus-Zayas, 655 F.3d 1092 (9th Cir. 2011). “Matus-Zayas specifically challenges the district court’s decision to admit into evidence videotaped deposition testimony of detained material witnesses pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3144 . For the first time on appeal, Matus-Zayas argues that the statute is facially invalid and that…”
Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 179 L. Ed. 2d 1149 (2011). “” 18 U.S.C. § 3144 . Material witnesses enjoy the same constitutional right to pretrial release as other federal detainees, and federal law requires release if their testimony “can adequately be secured by deposition, and if further detention is not necessary to prevent a…”
United States v. Awadallah, 202 F. Supp. 2d 55 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). “* * * * * * In 1984, Congress enacted 18 U.S.C. § 3144 (“section 3144”), commonly known as the “material witness statute.”
United States v. Abdullahi Farah, 766 F.3d 599 (6th Cir. 2014). “The district judge inquired if a deposition could be taken pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3144 . Defense counsel responded that, while he raised the subject of a deposition in his motion, he inartfully did so and meant to argue that such an endeavor would be futile because Farah would…”
In the Matter of Justin Alexander Marshall Justin Alexander Marshall v. State of Iowa, 805 N.W.2d 145 (Iowa 2011). “18 U.S.C. § 3144 (2006). While the legislation established a general power to detain material witnesses when it would be impracticable to secure presence in a criminal proceeding through a subpoena, it also 5The concept of recognizance is distinct from the posting of sureties or…”
In Re the United States for a Material Witness Warrant, 213 F. Supp. 2d 287 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). “John Doe, 1 who was initially in the custody of the Immigration and Naturalization Service in another state and subject to an order of deportation, was transferred to the custody of the Department of Justice pursuant to a material witness warrant issued under 18 U.S.C. § 3144…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.