Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :07-cr-00093-SLR Document 13 Filed 07/17/2007 Page 1 of 2
m AO 472 (Rev. 3/ B6) Order of Detention Pending Trial
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
District of Delaware
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
Jonathan McKinney. Case O`? - Q.? SL Z
Defendant
In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3 l42(t), a detention hearing has been held. I conclude that the following facts require the
detention of the defendant pending trial in this case.
Part I—Findings of Fact
Q (l) The defendant is charged with an offense described in 18 U.S.C. § 3l42(i)(l) 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 term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed in
=l=
Q a felony that was committed after the defendant had been convicted of two or more prior federal offenses described in l8 U.S.C.
§ 3 l42(f)(l)(A)-(C), or comparable state or local offenses.
Q (2) The offense described in finding (I) 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) and the community. I further find that the defendant has not rebutted this presumption.
Alternative Findings (A)
(I) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense
for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed in .
Q under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).
Q (2) The defendant has not rebutted the presumption established by finding l that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure
the appearance of the defendant as required and the safety ofthe community.
Alternative Findings (B)
(I) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear. n `‘``"”`“ `“' ` ` `` " is ""`”" ` "I" `````
(2) There is a serious risk that the defendant will endanger the safety of another person or the communi . _ ____ _ ww ,_ Y ME
l ” `1i`i"iiEjT'TF!f‘,‘? #s;2_e.=a¤_ite
Part II—Written Statement of Reasons for Detention _ W W in I Iilll N l I D Ilil l l l
I find that the credible testimony and information submitted at the hearing establishes by clear and convincing evidence a prepon-
derance ofthe evidence: Defendant was detained because there are no conditions or combination thereof that will reasonable assure his
appearance as requred and the safety of the community . Defendant is charged with child porn offense for which the rebuttable presumption applies.
Defendant has not rebutted that presumption andthe evidence against defendant is substantial in support of the offense, which supports the issue
of danger to the community. lm
I. At the time of the offenses, defendant resided with his parents. Residin g with them apparently had not effect on his behavior.
2. Defendant is a heroin addict since 2003 and was on methadone for 3 years. He continues to smoke MJ on occasion.
3. Was fired from his employment as a result of the present arrest. He was employed as a customer service rep for 9 months, which provided him
access to computers. His education is in IT. He is very computer literate.
4. Defendant suffers tim depression! anxiety and is under treatment for this condition. lgdwmlazl Vhuh/4;,;,, · ._
{ léwréi 6· ffé ··· Av 4';Z;,(_¢.. W
,7•é4¢;$ ¢°·&4¢w :954. ytteinuté @‘•é‘·•v‘vv.
Part IH—Directions Regarding Detention

Case 1 :07-cr-00093-SLR Document 13 Filed 07/17/2007 Page 2 of 2
% AO 472 (Rev. 3/ B6) Order of Detention Pending Trial
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 of the corrections facility shall deliver the defend · : · ·‘ • ‘ c • States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in
connection with a court proceeding. I
Jury 17, 2007 4X; · ‘
Date r _ " azure 0fJuo‘Ic cer
_ ry Pat Thynge, M strate Judge
me and T {Ile of Judicial Officer
*Insert as applicable: (a) Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 et s q.) (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).