Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :08-mj—OOO67-UNA Document 8 Filed O4/O3/2008 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
District of Delaware
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V, ORDER F DE ENTION PENDING TRIAL
William Harris Case M
Defendant
In accordance with the Bail Refomi Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), a detention hearing has been held. l conclude that the following facts require the
detention of the defendant pending trial in this ease.
Part I——Findings of Fact
Q (1) The defendant is charged with an offense described in 18 U.S.C. § 3 l42(f)(1) and has been convicted of a Q federal offense Q state
or local offense that would have been a federal offense if a circumstance giving rise to federal jurisdiction had existed that is
Q a crime of violence as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 3l56(a)(4).
Q an offense for which the maximum sentence is life imprisonment or death.
Q an offense for which a maximum tem1 of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed in
=h
Q a felony that was committed after the defendant had been convicted of two or more prior federal offenses described in 18 U.S.C. L
§ 3 142(f)(1)(A)-(C), or comparable state or local offenses.
Q (2) The offense described in finding (l) was committed while the defendant was on release pending trial for a federal, state or local offense.
Q (3) A period of not more than five years has elapsed sincc the Q date of conviction Q release of thc defendant from imprisonment
_ for the offense described in finding (1). _ _ ,_
Q (4) Findings Nos. (1), (2) and (3) establish a rebuttablc presumption that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the
safety of (an) other person(s) and the community. I further find that the defendant has not rebutted this presumption.
Alternative Findings (A) ` ‘
_ (1) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense
for which a maximum tem1 of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed in .
_, Q under l8`U.S.C. § 924(c). ._ ,,,_;
Q (2) The defendant has not rebutted thc presumption established by finding 1 that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure
the appearance of the defendant as required and thc safety of the community.
Alternative Findings (B) 1 ,
(1) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear.
(2) There is a serious risk that the defendant will endanger the safety of another person or the community.
Part H—Written Statement of Reasons for Detention
I find that the credible testimony and infomtation submitted at the hearing establishes by X clear and convincing evidence X a prepon—-
derance of the evidence; Defendant waived his right to a preliminary hearing and a detention hearing but reserved the right to revisit detention at a
later time depending on the evidence which was granted. ln addition, there are no conditions or combination thereof that will reasonably assure
defendant’s appearance as required and the safety of the community under an analysis of § 3142 which warrants defendant’s detention:
Nature of the Offense: Defendant is charge with possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. This offense falls into the more serious category.
Strength of the evidence: The affidavit in support of thc criminal complaint shows that defendant was observed hiding an item in a cinder bloclfl
When the cinder block was inspected immediately thereafter, a hand gun was removed with 5 rounds of an1rnunition. After receiving his E , _
Miranda rights and eonfimiing that he understood those rights, when asked by the affiant whether the defendant had the gun from criminal use or
protection, defendant responded that it was for protection “becausc of the way the world is today." The fircarrn is a Valor Corporation .25
caliber semiautomatic handgun which was operable and manufactured in a state other than DE which meant that it had to travel in interstate ‘
commerce. As a result of those uncontested facts, the evidence against defendant is substantial in support of the offense.
Characteristics of defendant: Defendant is a lifelong resident of thc MD-DE communities having living in Wilmington with his sister for the past 4
years. He is unemployed and claims that he has back difficulty due to arthritis. His prior work history before 2007 is very limited. He appears tb"
have a possible alcohol problem since he consumes about two miniatures a day and beer. He has a past history of substance abuse. He has used at `
least 9 aliases, 2 dates of birth and 2 social security numbers. His criminal history is significant and includes: a pending charge for theft; 2001 `
possession of a deadly weapon during the commission of a felon and robbery lst for which hc was found in VOP in 2004; possession, use or ' "
consumption of a narcotic schedule l controlled substance in lunc 1999 and found in VOP in December 1999; aggravated menacing with displaying
what appears to be a deadly weapon convicted in May 1998 and found in VOP June 1999 and August 2004; robbery lst involving a crime against a
65 year old or older (2 counts) and assault 3d in 1995 for which he found in VOP in December 1997 and again in June 1999. The above convictions
are just the highlights of dcfendant’s extensive criminal career which began in 1973. Although he has family ties, thosc have not prevented ._ _
criminal’activity by defendant. Further his conduct in attempting to hide the weapon strongly suggests that he was aware that possession by him is
illegal. l

Case 1 :08-mj—OOO67-UNA Document 8 Filed O4/O3/2008 Page 2 of 2
% AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial

Part III—Directions Regarding Detention A
The defendant is committed to thc custody of the Attorney General or his designated representative for confinement in a corrections facility separate,
to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal. The defendant shall be afforded a
reasonable opportunity for private consultation with defense counsel. On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the
Government, the person in charge of the corrections facility shall deliver the defend nited States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in
connection with a court proceeding.
APE`! 3, 2003 `
Date Signature cf ic Ojfcer
Mary Pat Thynge, Magistrate Judge
Name and T file qfludiciol Officer
*Insert as applicable: (a) Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 er seq.); (b) Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. § 951 er
seq.); or (c) Section 1 ofAct ofSept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).

Case 1:08-mj-00067-UNA

Document 8

Filed 04/03/2008

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:08-mj-00067-UNA

Document 8

Filed 04/03/2008

Page 2 of 2