Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :08-cr-00137-UNA Document 1 1 Filed 08/25/2008 Page 1 of 2
Q AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial
District of Delaware
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
Kenneth Kilson Case . M _ 2
Defendant
In accordance with thc Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3l42(f), a detention hearing has been held. 1 conclude that thc 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. § 3 142(f)(1) 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 risc to federal jurisdiction had existed that is
Q a crime ofviolcnce as deHned 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 prcscribed in
U
Q a felony that was eommitted alter the defendant had been convicted of two or more prior federal offenses described in 18 U.S.C.
§ 3142(f)(l)(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 (I) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense
X for which a maximum term of imprisonment often years or more is prescribed in 2l USC §§ 841 & 846 .
Q under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).
X (2) The defendant has not rebutted the presumption established by Ending 1 that no condition or combination of conditions 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 End that the credible testimony and infomtation submitted at the hearing establishes by X clear and convincing evidence X a prepon-
derance of the evidence: Defendant presently does not opposed the government’s motion for detention but reserves the right to do so in the future
which was granted. In addition to defendant’s non-opposition, the nature ofthe offense against defendant is serious since it is conspiracy
to posses with intent to distribute more than 500 grams of cocaine. The amount of cocaine intercepted was 3 kilos or 7+ pounds. As a result ofa
preliminary hearing, this court found probable cause, so the govemment’s evidence supports the charge under a totality ofthe circumstances analysis.
As a result, both the nature of the offense and strength of evidence in support of the charge are against release. Defendant’s criminal history is also
beginning at age S-9 years. Between 1996-1999 while ajuvenile, defendant was arrest 12 times for various offenses predominately theft, shoplifting,
assault. However in 1999, he was found delinquent on the charge of possession with intent to deliver a narcotic controlled schedule ll substance.
In 2001 he was convicted of possession of MJ and possession of a controlled deadly substance in MD for which he was found in VOP in 2003.
ln 2001 he was convicted of possession with intent to deliver a narcotic controlled substance for which he was found VOP in 2002. 1N 2003 he was
convicted of fleeing and eluding police in MD and possession ofa cocain and possession ofa controlled deadly substance paraphernalia. 1-le was
also convicted of fugitive from justice (Delaware took custody) and presently has pending as a result of his arrest for the federal charges resisting
arrest with force or violence and reckless endangering first degree (resulting from defendant’s attempt to flee federal agents and also attempted and
drove his vehicle into two of’ficers’ vehicle while trying to flee). Therefore, there are not conditions or combination thereof that will reasonably
assure defendant’s appearance as required and the safety of the cornrnunity. F I L E D
us. cisEii&`c0uRr
DiSlli'lCT OF DELAWARE

Case 1 :08-cr-00137-UNA Document 11 Filed 08/25/2008 Page 2 of 2
% AO 472 (Rev. 3/B6) Order of Detention Pending Trial
Part HI——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 atforded 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 defendant to the United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in
connection with a court proceeding. -
August 25, 2008
Date Signal o dfcfal Ojicer
Mary Pat hynge, Magistrate Judge
Name and Title of Judicial Ojfficer
*lnsert 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 ex
seq.); or (c) Section l ofAct ofSept. I5, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).

Case 1:08-cr-00137-UNA

Document 11

Filed 08/25/2008

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:08-cr-00137-UNA

Document 11

Filed 08/25/2008

Page 2 of 2