Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :06-cr-00031-JJF Document 26 Filed 04/28/2006 Page 1 of 2
% AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
District of Delaware
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDE OF DETENTIONPENDING TRIAL
Francesco Berrera—Lopez Case C .. gl .. ( _, {
Defendant
In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, l8 U.S.C. § 3l42(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 (l) The defendant is charged with an offense described in IS U.S.C. § 3l42(f)(l) 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 IS U.S.C. § 3I56(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 of two or more prior federal offenses described in 18 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 ofconviction Q release ofthe defendant from imprisonment
for the offense described in finding (l).
Q (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)
X (I) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense
X for which a maximum term ofimprisonment often years or more is prescribed in 2l USC § 84l .
Q under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).
X (2) The defendant has not rebutted the presumption established by finding I that no condition or combination ofconditions will reasonably assure
the appearance ofthe defendant as required and the safety ofthe community. -
Alternative Findings (B) I " __ · , `
(I) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear. ’ ‘ ‘ ‘i
(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 ofthe evidence: Defendant did not oppose the government’s motion for detention but reserved the right for review ofthis order in the
future which was granted. In addition to defendant’s non—opposition, the court finds that there are no conditions or combination thereofthat
will reasonably assure defendant’s appearance as required and the safety ofthe community for the following reasons:
l. Defendant appears to be an illegal alien (Mexican national) and as a result cannot legally be employed or reside in the US.
2. Since defendant refused to be interviewed by Pretrial Service, the court has very limited information regarding defendant including stability of
residence, family in the US, employment and past criminal history.
3. The present charge involves a significant drug offense for which a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment would be imposed.

Case 1 :06-cr-00031-JJF Document 26 Filed 04/28/2006 Page 2 of 2
% AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial
Part III—Directi0ns 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 ofa court ofthe United States or on request of an attorney for the
Government, the person in charge ofthe corrections facility shall deliver the defendanfto the United States marshal for the purpose ofan appearance
in connection with a court proceeding. ‘ - D A
April ze, 2006 K _ .- -· "' l L2 A `- ” vi, me __
Date » Signature of./udicirzl’ r
Mary Pat Thynge, Magistrate Judge
Name and Title ofJuc/icial Ojfcer
*1nser·t 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
et seq.); or (c) Section 1 ofAct ofSept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).