Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :06-mj-001 22—l\/I PT Document 7 Filed 11/O2/2006 Page 1 of 2
°§s AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order ofDetention Pending Trial
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
District of Delaware
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
Manuel de la Cruz Saldana Case F1"
Defendant O Q ' kA - M `
In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, I8 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 (I) The defendant is charged with an offense described in IS U.S.C. § 3l42(f)(I) and has been convicted ofa lj federal offense [I state
or local offense that would have been a federal offense ifa circumstance giving rise to federaljurisdiction had existed that is
Q a crime ofviolence as defined in I8 U.S.C. § 3 I56(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<
[j a felony that was committed after the defendant had been convicted of two or more prior federal offenses described in I 8 U.S.C.
§ 3 I42(f)(l)(A)—(C), or comparable state or local offenses.
I] (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 |] release ofthe defendant from imprisonment
for the offense described in finding (I).
E] (4) Findings Nos. (I), (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 ofimprisonment often years or more is prescribed in .
Q under l8 U.S.C. § 924(c).
U (2) The defendant has hot tebtttted the presumption established by tinding I that no condition or c<>mbinJ>m¤al.t.tn" dititms vgihreawabb/_a§§g¤te____
the appearance ofthe defendant as required and the safety ofthe community. I L
Alternative Findings (B) !......_______ ‘ _ 5
X (I) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear. r {
X (2) There is a serious risk thatthe defendant will endanger the safety of another person or the commun ty. G any _
I
I tz TTT T7`? ¤`§T`“"”
Part II—Written Statement of Reasons for Detention
I find that the credible testimony and infonnation submitted at the hearing establishes by X clear and convincing evidence X a prepon-
derance ofthe evidence: Defendant did not oppose the govemment’s motion for detention, In addition, the court on the following bases finds that
there are no conditions or combination thereofthat will reasonably assure defendant’s appearance as required and the safety ofthe community;
I. The court is not certain regarding defendant’s true name. Although the evidence showed that the defendant arrested on the federal charge of
illegal reentry is the same individual presently facing drug related state charges and also is the same individual previously deported, defendant has
been known by at least 7 aliases. Further, his wife knows him by another name not included as one of his aliases. Defendant has also used 4
different dates of birth.
2. Defendant reported and it was confirmed that he is a citizen ofthe Dominican Republic. The records also confirm that defendant has been
deported as an illegal alien on two prior occasions.
3. Besides his deportation history, which until recently were the only criminal matters on his record, defendant was charged on IO/6/O6 by the
state ofDe for serious drug offenses (forgery, manufactur/delivery/possession with intent to distribute a narcotic schedule I/II controlled
substance and maintaining a vehicle for keeping a controlled substance). Those charges are presently outstanding and his arrest for those offenses
lead to his discovery in the US and his arrest on the federal charge.
4. Defendant reported that "a friend", Danelcy Santos could confirm information he provided. Ms. Santos claimed that she was defendant’s wife
and her statement was confirmed by state records. At the same time, defendant claimed that he could live with a friend, another woman, if released.
He also advised that he was living at a home on Patrician Blvd. in which he rented a room from a Ms. Senfort. Ms. Santos reported that her husband
the defendant’s "real" name was Christian Senfort (the name that was not part ofthe list of aliases defendant has used according to NCIC, FBI and
ICE records). Ms Santos als reported that she lived with defendant at an apartment on Patrician Blvd and that they recently moved to another
address on Melson Road (this address is not the same address ofthe woman defendant claimed he could live with if released). Clearly, defendant
was not completely truthful with Pretrial Services regarding his past history and his future living arrangements.

Case 1 :06-mj-001 22-M PT Document 7 Filed 11/O2/2006 Page 2 of 2
% AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial
The evidence was very strong that defendant is in the US illegally.
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 ofthe United States or on request of an attomey for the
Government, 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. , ,
November 2, 2006 {_.___
Date Signature Ja cia! Ojicer
Mary Pat Thy ge, Magistrate Judge
Name and Title 0fJudicial Ojicer
*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 ez
seq.); or (c) Section l ofAct ofSept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).