Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :07-cr—OOO22-JJ F Document 10 Filed O2/23/2007 Page 1 of 2 I
% AOt472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending T1·ial
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT (
District of Delaware
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V, ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
Steven Kellam Case O K O _ , P
Defendant
In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3l42(f), a detention hearing has been held. I conclude that the following facts require the F
detention of the 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. § 3 l42(f)(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
' ¤i¤
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.
§ 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 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)
X ( 1) 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 21 USC § 841 & 846 .
Q under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).
XI] (2) The defendant has not rebutted the presumption established by finding 1 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)
(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 _
I 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: the court fmds that there are no conditions or combination thereof that will reasonably assure defendant’s appearance as
required and the safety of the community on the following bases:
1. There is significant evidence against defendant that he was involved in a drug trasnaction, that is possession with intent to distribute cocaine.
In additional to survelliance, the govemment has taped telephone conversations of defendant negotiating dmg sales and a controlled buy with a
CI.
2. Regarding defendant’s characteristics, he was convicted of possession with intent to deliver cocaine in January 2006 and was on probation at the
time of the federal drug arrest. I-Ie was convicted in 2003 for possession of heroin and possession of drug paraphemalia, for which he was found in
VOP.
3. Although defendant claims that he was laid off in December 2006 from his job and has started his owned business with referrals from his former
employer as a self-employed buffer, he is also presently more than $3,000 in arrears for child support.
4. Moreover, the address provided is inconsistent with the address given to his state PO. $______,..,
l FEB 2 3 EGG? L
us. tisiriléiiciousr
U'$l*`**Qi.9i.9.iL%l*tti*£.--...v ‘

Case 1 :07-cr—00O22-JJF Document 10 Filed O2/23/2007 Page 2 of 2
% AO°472 (liev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial
Part ]II—Directious Regarding Detention
The defendant is committed to the custody ofthe Attorney General or his designated representative for continement 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
Govemment, the person in charge ofthe corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to the United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in
connection with a court proceeding. ·
February 23, 2007
Date S1'gmr1ure of udicial ]j‘ice
Mary Pat Thynge, Magistrate Judge
Name cmd Title of Judicial Officer
*1nsert as applicable: (a) Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.); (b) Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. § 951 er
seq.); or (c) Section 1 ofAct of Sept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).
[T" i .E `___ _`__ it