Bail denied for Miura

Superior Court Associate Judge Ramona V. Manglona yesterday denied Kazuyoshi Miura’s request to let him out on bail.

“In my reading of the law, Mr. Miura is not entitled to bail,” said Manglona during the hearing that lasted over an hour. She said she would issue a written order.

William Fitzgerald, one of Miura’s lawyers, said they are going to appeal the ruling to the CNMI Supreme Court.

Manglona said she reviewed the CNMI and federal extradition laws, particularly on the issue of granting bail. She said the CNMI extradition law explicitly states that a person is entitled to bail unless the offense that is charged is punishable by death or life imprisonment under the laws of the state in which it was committed.

In this case, she said, Miura is charged with the offense of special circumstances murder and conspiracy to commit murder, which are punishable by life imprisonment or death under California laws.

Manglona said under the majority state courts’ views, Miura is mandated to be held without bail because he is charged with a capital offense in an extradition proceeding.

Manglona said she is also aware of the minority state courts’ views. The judge noted that in fact all minority case laws recognize that, even in New Jersey, bail is allowed in extradition matters except those punishable by life imprisonment or death.

Manglona set the hearing for Miura’s petition for habeas corpus on Sept. 12 at 10am.

In an interview with the media after the hearing, Fitzgerald said they are going to appeal to the CNMI Supreme Court because they believe they have a good reason for the 60-year-old Miura to be released on bail.

Assistant attorney general Jeffery Warfield Sr. told Saipan Tribune that they already expected Manglona’s ruling.

“We felt the case law was very clear that he was not entitled to bail. So we weren’t surprised,” Warfield said.

At the hearing, Fitzgerald opened his argument with a federal court ruling that states, “In our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception.”

Fitzgerald said Manglona has the inherent power to grant bail in Miura’s case. The lawyer said it is the court’s duty to inquire about the impropriety of Miura’s detention.

“This is not the usual extradition case!” Fitzgerald pointed out, adding that the normal extradition case is when a person is running away.

“That’s not the situation we have here,” said Fitzgerald, citing some background of the case.

Manglona interrupted the lawyer and told him to focus on the extradition matter and not on some factual issues in ’80s.

Fitzgerald continued that when there is a constitutional issue, the judge has a duty to grant bail.

The defense’s position is that denial of an opportunity for Miura to obtain bail violates rights provided him under the U.S. and CNMI Constitutions.

In addition to due process rights to liberty, the defense also maintained that Miura is entitled to bail under the “special circumstances” doctrine.

Fitzgerald said it is just a waste of court resources and time when the California court will eventually quash the warrant and dismiss the case.

The lawyer said Miura is not a flight risk and, in fact, contrary to Detective Rick Jackson’s affidavit, the businessman went back to California six times after the shooting of his wife in 1981.

“Mr. Miura is suffering in jail. You have the authority to release him with some conditions,” Fitzgerald told Manglona, adding that the judge can grant bail under the special circumstances doctrine.

In opposing the motion, AGO’s Warfield argued that the CNMI’s extradition statute explicitly states that someone who is charged with capital offense is not entitled to bail.

Warfield said once the governor issues a warrant, the asylum state is mandated to turn over the extraditee, particularly when the offense carries a death penalty.

He asserted that this is an extradition case and therefore the extradition law should be followed and not the general bail statute.

The prosecutor described Miura’s argument that the law only applies before the governor’s issuance of an arrest warrant for extradition as “illogical.”

“I believed that it is illogical to think that someone not being entitled to bail before governor’s warrant but then after the governor’s warrant comes and California sent all the paperwork, suddenly he can make bail. That doesn’t makes sense to me and I think the court agreed,” Warfield told Saipan Tribune.

When asked about his client’s reaction to Manglona’s ruling, Fitzgerald said Miura is in good spirits and is looking forward to the hearing in California regarding his motion to quash the arrest warrant.

“He seems pretty healthy,” the lawyer said.

With respect to his meeting with celebrity attorney Mark Geragos, Fitzgerald said he had two nights’ meeting with Geragos in the latter’s office in California.

“It was great. Very nice guy and great lawyer. He’s very optimistic,” he said.