In re Koželuh
| Decision Date | 08 July 2022 |
| Docket Number | 3:21-MJ-2231-JEM |
| Parties | In the MATTER OF the EXTRADITION OF Vladimir KOŽELUH |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Tennessee |
Casey Thomas Arrowood, United States Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice (Knox USAO) Office of U.S. Attorney, Knoxville, TN, for USA.
Benjamin Gerald Sharp, Public Defender, Federal Defender Services of Eastern Tennessee, Inc., Knoxville, TN, Bryan E. Delius, Bryce W. McKenzie, Delius & McKenzie, PLLC, Sevierville, TN, for Vladimir Koželuh.
MEMORANDUM, ORDER, AND CERTIFICATION AND COMMITTAL FOR EXTRADITION
This case is before the Court on the Government's request for certification of Vladimir Koželuh ("Koželuh") for extradition to the Czech Republic [Doc. 9], and the Government's Motion in Limine to Preclude Testimony at the Extradition Hearing [Doc. 19].
On February 23, 2022, the Court conducted an extradition hearing [Doc. 22]. Assistant United States Attorney Casey Arrowood represented the Government. Attorneys Bryan E. Delius and Bryce W. McKenzie represented Koželuh. Upon consideration of the record and the information presented during the hearing and in the post-hearing briefs filed by the parties [Docs. 25, 26, 30, 32], the Court grants the Government's motion in limine [Doc. 19] and certifies that Vladimir Koželuh is extraditable. It therefore refers this matter to the United States Secretary of State for its determination whether to surrender Koželuh to authorities in the Czech Republic.
The United States filed a Criminal Complaint against Vladimir Koželuh, which initiated extradition proceedings under 18 U.S.C. § 3184 [Doc. 3]. This Court issued an arrest warrant for Koželuh under the Treaty between the United States and Czechoslovakia for the Extradition of Fugitives from Justice, U.S.-Czech, July 2, 1925, 44 Stat. 2367, as amended by Supplementary Extradition Treaty between the United States of America and Czechoslovakia, U.S.-Czech, Apr. 29, 1935, 49 Stat. 3253, and Second Supplementary Treaty on Extradition between the United States of America and the Czech Republic, U.S.-Czech., May 16, 2006, S. Treaty Doc. No. 109-14 (2006) (collectively, the "Treaty") [Exh. 2].1 On January 5, 2022, Koželuh was arrested and made an initial court appearance [Doc. 4]. At that time, the Court ordered him detained [Doc. 7]. On January 19, 2022, Koželuh's appointed counsel moved the Court to withdraw and to substitute counsel retained by Koželuh, which the Court granted [Doc. 11]. Koželuh also asked for a bail hearing to determine whether Koželuh would be detained or released pending the outcome of this matter [Doc. 15]. The Court denied Koželuh's request for release finding that, while not a flight risk, Koželuh did not show a special circumstance or combination of special circumstances that warranted his release [Doc. 18].
According to the Government, based upon information provided by the Government of the Czech Republic, "[u]nder Czech law, citizens of the Czech and Slovack Republic or their heirs may seek restitution for the Communist Party's confiscation of property between 1948 and 1991, the death of livestock on the property, and the property's depreciation" [Doc. 3, Affidavit to Criminal Complaint, p. 3]. In or around January 1997, four siblings held three claims to seek such restitution "in the total amount of approximately CZK 3,590,230 (USD $155,694) because the former Communist government confiscated their paternal grandfather Josef Hégr's property around 1948" [Id. ]. Wanting to sell the claims, the siblings gave Anna Hégrová—who was their father's widow as well as the mother to two of the siblings and stepmother to the other two siblings—power of attorney to represent them [Id. ]. Hégrová, working with an attorney, located potential buyer Koželuh, and provided contracts for the siblings’ signatures [Id. ]. Pursuant to the contract, the siblings agreed to assign the claims to Koželuh for approximately eighty percent (80%) of their nominal value, which was approximately CZK 2,872,200 or USD $124,556, and Koželuh, who said he could not pay the purchase price at the time of the agreement, would pay the family after he sold the claims [Id. at 3–4].
Also in January 1997, the Government asserts that Koželuh entered into several contracts with members of the Hégr family [Id. at 3]. Under three written assignment contracts, all dated January 20, 1997, the Hégr siblings assigned each of their three claims for restitution to Koželuh in exchange for payment [Id. ]. On January 22, 1997, Koželuh entered into a written loan agreement with Hégrová, pursuant to which she extended Koželuh credit in the amount of CZK 2,872,200 (), which Koželuh agreed to repay within seven months (i.e., by August 22, 1997) [Id. ]. The loan agreement was secured by a Bill to Order, also dated January 22, 1997, and also signed by Koželuh [Id. ].
Further according to the Government, by March 5, 1997, Koželuh secured recognition by the Land Fund of the Czech Republic and the original debtors of the claims to Koželuh as the new beneficiary of the claims [Id. ]. Under these subrogation contracts, which Koželuh signed, the Land Fund assumed the debts under the claims of each of the original debtors [Id. at 3–4]. On March 11, 1997, Koželuh assigned by written contract all three claims to the Agricultural Cooperative Kladruby-Vojenice for their full value of CZK 3,590,230 [Id. at 4]. The Land Fund registered this assignment from Koželuh to the Agricultural Cooperative [Id. ].
According to the siblings, Hégrová made several efforts to contact Koželuh before the August 22, 1997 due date, but Koželuh never told the Hégr family that he had located a buyer for their claims [Id. ]. Rather, they claimed, he sent letters stating the opposite—that he had not been able to collect on the claims [Id. ]. Specifically, they point to an August 18, 1997 letter from Koželuh to Hégrová, in which Koželuh claimed that he had not been able to collect on the claims due to bad economic circumstances and requested patience and more time to pay what he owed [Id. ]. Soon thereafter, Koželuh paid Hégrová CZK 22,200 [Id. at 5], and on February 2, 1998, 3 Koželuh sent Hégrová a letter in which he apologized and stated that due to his insolvency, the claims would be returned to her in full [Id. ]. Hégrová died on or about February 13, 1998 [Id. ]. According to the Government, Koželuh never paid any other compensation for the claims, returned the claims, nor told Hégrová or the siblings that he had sold or otherwise made money from the claims, and Koželuh left the Czech Republic on or about February 26, 1999 [Id. ].
On the basis of these facts, the Government provides that, "[o]n June 2, 2008, the District Court in Mlada Boleslav, Czech Republic, convicted Koželuh of committing fraud within the jurisdiction of the Czech Republic, in violation of section 250(1)(3)(b) of the 1691 Czech Criminal Code, and sentenced him to five years of imprisonment" [Id. at 2–3]. Later that year, the High Court in Prague affirmed Koželuh's conviction and sentence [Id. at 3]. Koželuh was not present for those proceedings, but he was represented by counsel throughout the proceedings [Id. ]. The Czech District Court issued a warrant for his arrest on January 2, 2011, and made an addendum to the warrant on April 8, 2011 [Id. ].
At the extradition hearing, the Government introduced two exhibits, which were marked as Government's Exhibit 1 and 2 [Doc. 24, Tr. pp. 6–10]. Government's Exhibit 1-A through 1-CC is the Czech Republic's request for Koželuh's extradition [Id. at 7]. The Government asserted that the extradition request submitted by the Ministry of Justice of the Czech Republic is signed by the Director of the International Department for Criminal Matters and contains the seal of the Czech Republic's Ministry of Justice, making it authentic and admissible in the extradition proceeding pursuant to Article 11 of the Treaty [Id. ].2 Among other things, it includes the arrest warrant, indictments, a record of the case, the text of the relevant Czech statutes, a statement of identification of Mr. Koželuh, a selection of documents submitted during the trial, the trial court judgment, and the appellate court opinion affirming the conviction [Id. at 8]. Exhibit 2 is a declaration of Tom Heinemann, an attorney with the Office of Legal Adviser of the State Department, which attaches a copy of the Treaty [Id. at 8–9]. In this declaration, Mr. Heinemann states that the Czech Republic's extradition request was properly authenticated in accordance with the Treaty [Id. at 9]. The Government submits that the declaration states the view of the executive branch that the Treaty is in full force and effect; that the offense for which the Czech Republic has requested extradition is covered by the Treaty; and that the extradition request was authenticated in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty [Id. ].
Koželuh called two witnesses—his wife and his son—and he also testified [Id. at 2]. He introduced several exhibits, which included photos and documents containing Koželuh's signature [Id. ]. In summary,3 Mrs. Koželuh testified that she began dating Koželuh in 1995, and the following year she gave birth to their son. They lived in very meager conditions in the Czech Republic. She said in February 1999, Koželuh was able to save enough money, approximately "a couple hundred dollars," to travel to America. She and her son stayed behind because the family lacked the funds to travel with him. When Koželuh arrived in America, she said that he worked strenuous jobs cleaning hotel rooms and shared an apartment with five or six other immigrants, where he slept on the living room floor. She explained that in June of 1999, she and her son were able to travel to Tennessee to join the Defendant with only $200. Mrs. Koželuh further testified that...
To continue reading
Request your trial