Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :08-mj-00126-UNA Document 8 Filed 07/29/2008 Page 1 of 1
Q AO 472 (Rev. 12/03) Order of Detention Pending Trial
District of DELAWARE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
BERAMINO LOPEZ-MORALES, Case Number: OS-126-M
Dejbndrmt
In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3l42(f), a detention hearing has been held. 1 conclude that the following facts require the
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, § 3142(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 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 of ten years or more is prescribed in
»=
Q a felony that was committed after the defendant had been convicted of two or more prior federal offenses described in IS 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. 1 further tind that the defendant has not rebutted this presumption.
Alternative Findings (A)
Q (1) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense
Q for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed in .
Q under IS U.S.C. § 924(c).
Q (2) The defendant has not rebutted the presumption established by finding 1 that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure
the appearance ofthe defendant as required and the safety of the community.
Alternative Findings (B)
X (1) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear.
Q (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 find that the credible testimony and information submitted at the hearing establishes by [I clear and convincing evidence X a prepon-
dcrance ofthe evidence that
The Defendant waived his right to a detention hearing. Based on the report ofthe Probation Office, and other information before the Court -
including the affidavit supporting the complaint against Defendant for illegal re—entry into the U.S., which sets out that Defendant has been
previously deported - the Court finds by a preponderance ofthe evidence that no combination of conditions could reasonably assure that the
Defendant would appear for all Court events in this matter.
Part llI—Directions Regarding Detention
The defendant is committed to the custody ofthe Attomey 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 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 State marshal for the purpose of an appearance
in connection with a coun proceeding.
JULY 29TH. 2008 R '
Date Signature of Judge
Hon. Leonard P. Stark
Name and Title 0fJudge
*Insert as applicable: (a) Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 er seq.); (b) Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. § 951
etseq.); or (c) Section 1 ofAct ofSept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).

Case 1:08-mj-00126-UNA

Document 8

Filed 07/29/2008

Page 1 of 1