Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :O7—cr—OOO34-SLR Document 1 1 Filed O4/O4/2007 Page 1 of 2
es AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
District of Delaware -
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
Tony L. Clagk Case C (20*],,. _, €
efendant
ln accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S,C. § 3142(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)(1) and has been convicted ofa Q federal offense Q state
or local offense that would have been a federal offense ifa circumstance giving rise to federal jurisdiction had existed that is
Q a crime ofviolence as defined in 18 U.S.C, § 3156(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
>l<
Q a felony that was committed after the defendant had been convicted oftwo or more prior federal offenses described in 18 U,S.C.
§ 3142(f)(1)(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 ofthe 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 ofconditions will reasonably assure the
safety of (an) other person(s) and the community. 1 further Gnd 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 term of imprisonment often 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 1 that no condition or combination ofconditions will reasonably assure
the appearance of the defendant as required and the safety of the community.
Alternative Findings (B)
(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 II——Written Statement of Reasons for Detention
1 Gnd that the credible testimony and information submitted at the hearing establishes by X clear and convincing evidence X a prepon-
derance ofthe evidence; that there are no conditions that will reasonably assure defendant’s appearance as required and the safety ofthe community:
1, The evidence against defendant is sufficient to support the charge.
2. The evidence shows that in response to WPD, defendant fied and attempted to discard the evidence.
3. defendant, despite having close proximity to family, has a signincant criminal history that began when defendant was age 12-13 years.
4. Defendant was convicted of theft of a firearm in September 2002, Prior to that time, 2 capiases were issued for failure to appear, one for trial,
by May 2003 he was found VOP.
5. ln August 2005 defendant was convicted of possession ofa controlled substance within 300 feet of a park for which he received probation. He
was found VOP in October 2004, January 2006 and against in October 2006 for which he received 3 months imprisonment, He was eventually
discharged as unimproved. He was also convicted ofpossession of cocaine and possession ofdrug paraphernalia in January 2006, which probably
resulted in the VOP in January 2006.

Case 1:O7—cr—OOO34-SLR Document 11 Filed O4/O4/2007 Page 2 of 2
®.t AO 472 (Rev, 3/86) Order ofDetention Pending Trial
Part III—Directions Regarding Detention
The defendant is committed to the custody ofthe Attorney General or his designated representative for eonnnement 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 defend o the United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in
connection with a court proceeding. /..·· ‘‘`' T
April 2, 2007 l ·
Date Signature 0 it tial Omcer
Mary Pat Thynge, Magistrate Judge
Name and Title 0fJudiciaI Ojjicer
*1nsert as applicable: (a) Controlled Substances Act (21 USC. § 801 et seq); (b) Controlled Substances import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. § 951 ez
seq.); or (c) Section 1 ofAct ofSept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).