U.S. v. Valenzuela-Espinoza, 697 F.3d 742 (9th Cir. 2012)

The 9th Circuit has such a  heavy caseload it needs more judges, according to members of the court.  Part of the caseload includes cases completetly unnecessary for a decision.  In fact, useless.This case is an example.

Valenzuela-Espinoza was convicted in 2010  and appealed.  In 2012 the 9th Circuit panel  held federal agents had detained the defendant in excess of the federal minimum hours of arraignment subequent to arrest and reversed the conviction. But the defendant had been convicted, sentenced and deported to Mexico by the time this appeal was written.  He remained on supervisory release. What possible rationale justifies this opinion? How is the  court agent going to supervise this defendant in Mexico?.  And the time wasted on this  irrelevant case?