Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :08-mj-001 1 8-U NA Document 10 Filed 07/21 /2008 Page 1 of 1
% AO 472 (Rev. 12/03) Order of Detention Pending Trial

District of DELAWARE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
HMMIE LEE PIERCE, Case Number: 08—118-M
Defendant
In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142(t`), a detention hearing has been held. 1 conclude that the following facts require the
detention ofthe defendant pending trial in this case.
Part l—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 of violence 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
e
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.
§ 3 142(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 (1) 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 21 USC § 841 .
Q under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).
X (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 of the community.
Alternative Findings (B)
Q (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
|| |, |· ·| ¤· ·. n•• .¤¤ ¤ inn- ¤·, 9•· ¤'*- ·'*'.. ';T..: .'i.: NClC8.I'H.l'idCOHViHCiHg€VidCHC€ [:]ap[€pGU'
derance ofthe evidence that
The Defendant waived his right to contest pretrial detention. Based on the affidavit of probable cause andthe evidence produced during the
preliminary hearing, as well as the report ofthe Probation Office e which establish, among other things, that Defendant has admitted that the
kilogram of cocaine found in the vehicle he was operating was intended for distribution, Defendant has no ties this district, and Defendant has
felony convictions for violent offenses as well as firearms and drug offenses — the Court finds that the Defendant has failed to rebut the statutory
presumption that no combination of conditions could reasonably assure the safety of the community between now and the time of trial and that the
Defendant would appear for all Court events in this matter.
Part III—Directi0ns 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 of the corrections facility shall deliver thc defendant to the United S s mars al for the purpose of an appearance
in connection with a court proceeding.
JULY 21ST, 2008 Q-·¤.¤ ‘ .
Date Stgntxzure of Judge
Hon. Leonard P. Stark
Name and Title of Judge
*Inscrt 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
erreQ·); or (c) Section 1 ofAct of Sept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S,C. § 955a).

Case 1:08-mj-00118-UNA

Document 10

Filed 07/21/2008

Page 1 of 1