Free Order on Motion to Detain Pending Trial - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :07-mj-00194-UNA Document 6 Filed 10/12/2007 Page 1 of 2
rss AO 472 (Rev. 12/03) Order of Detention Pending Trial
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
District of
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
John Williamson, Case Number: 07—l94M ‘
Dejbndcmr
ln accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3 l42(f), a detention hearing has been held. I conclude that the following facts require the
detention ofthe defendant pending trial in this case.
Part I—Findings of Fact
Q (1) The defendant is charged with an offense described in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(l) and has been convicted ofa 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 term of imprisonment often years or more is prescribed in ‘
r
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.
§ 3l42(t)(i)(A)-(C), or comparable state or local offenses.
Q (2) The offense described in finding (1) 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 since the Q date of conviction Q release of the defendant from imprisonment
for the offense described in finding (1). _
Q (4) Findings Nos. (1), (2) and (3) establish a rebuttable presumption that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the
safety of (an) other person(s) andthe community. 1 further find that the defendant has not rebuttcd this presumption.
Alternative Findings (A)
X (1) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense
Q for which amaximum term of imprisonment often years or more is prescribed in 21 USC 841 .
Q under 18 U.S.C. §924(c). ‘
X (2) The defendant has not rebutted the presumption established by finding 1 that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure i
the appearance of the defendant as required and the safety of the community. l F 5 E E H * j
Alternative Findings (B) _,______;_·__ M i
Q (1) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear.
Q (2) There is a serious risk that the defendant will endanger the safety of another person or the communi i, . . n _
OCT l Q 2uO/ i
1

_ .b. F. ICT COURT
I DKK/Tii·;.‘ti¤iE
Part II—Written Statement of Reasons for Detention
l find that the credible testimony and information submitted at the hearing establishes by X clear and convincing evidence X a prepon-
derance of the evidence that _
Based on the information before the Court, including that provided by the probation office as well as the patties by proffer during the detention
hearing, the Court finds that the Defendant has failed to rebut the statutory presumption that no combination of conditions could reasonably assure
the safety of the community between now and the time of trial and that the Defendant would appear for all Court events in this matter.
The Court has reached these conclusions based on the following findings and for the following reasons:
the nature and circumstances ofthe offense: the Defendant is accused of participating in a large cocaine distribution conspiracy in South Carolina,
extending from 2001 until 2007, and involving more than 5 kilograms of cocaine, with a street value in excess of $125,000. Two other
individuals participated in this conspiracy, at least one of which has pled guilty to related charges.
the weight of the evidence: is strong. A grandjury in the District of South Carolina found probable cause that the Defendant committed the crime
with which he is charged. ‘
the histogr and characteristics of the Defendant: The Defendant appears to have significant ties to Delaware, his current place of residence. He has
the support ofhis fiance, mother, father, and sister, all of whom were present for the detention hearing. He has maintained employment in
Delaware. When he learned ofthe charges pending against him in South Carolina, he attempted to retain counsel, apparently in an effort to
turn himselfin. Weighing against all of this, however, is Defcndant's criminal history, which includes two felony convictions in Delaware in or
around 1996 for carrying a concealed deadly instrument.
the nature and seriousness ofthe danger to the community that would be posed by the Defcndant's release: the drug conspiracy in which the
Defendant was allegedly engaged posed a substantial danger to the community. The Defendant has demonstrated some danger with his
dangerous instrument convictions as well.

Case 1 :07-mj-00194-UNA Document 6 Filed 10/12/2007 Page 2 of 2
% AO 472 (Rev. I2/03) Order of Detention Pending Trial
Part III—~Directions Regarding Detention
The defendant is committed to the custody ofthe 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 ofthe corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to the Unite States marshal for the purpose of an appearance
in connection with a court proceeding. yi Q
©c·§—»l·,¤2.r(g Acer; QAJS ··
Date Signature cfJudge .
Leonard P. Stark U.S. Magistrate
Name and Title ofJudge
*Insert as applicable: (a) Controlled Substances Act (2i U.S.C. § 801 et seq.); (b) Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. § 951
emeq.); or (c) Section l of Act of Sept. I5, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).

Case 1:07-mj-00194-UNA

Document 6

Filed 10/12/2007

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-mj-00194-UNA

Document 6

Filed 10/12/2007

Page 2 of 2