Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :08-cr-00105-JJF Document 14 Filed 07/28/2008 Page 1 of 1
e AO 472 (Rev. 12/03) Order of Detention Pending Trial
Uisrrreo S rxres Dtsrmcr Count
District of DELAWARE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
MATTHEW MINOR, Case Number: 08-105-JJF
Defendant
In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3 l42(f), a detention hearing has been held. I 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)(l) 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 IS 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
it
Q a felony that was committed after the defendant had been convicted of two or more prior federal offenses described in I8 U.S.C.
§ 3l42(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 of imprisonment often years or more is prescribed in 21 USC §§ 841 and 846 .
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
[I clear and convincing evidence [I a prepon-
derance of the evidence that
The Defendant waived his right to contest pretrial detention. Based on the Indictment and the report of the Probation Office — which establish,
among other things, probable cause to believe that Defendant was involved in a conspiracy to distribute more than 5 kilograms of cocaine and more
than 50 kilograms of marijuana over an approximately 5 month period; that Defendant has convictions for offenses including aggravated assault,
riot, and possession with intent to deliver cocaine; and has at least four violations of probation and five capiases for failure to appear for criminal or
traffic-related proceedings - the Court finds that the Defendant has failed to rebut the statutory presumption that no combination of conditions
could reasonably assure the safety ofthe community between now and the time of trial and that the Defendant would appear for all Court events in
this matter.
Part III—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 attomey for the
Govemment, the person in charge of the corrections facility shall deliver th defendant to Uni ates marshal for the purpose of an appearance
in connection with a court proceeding.
JULY 28TH, zoos °
Date Signature of Judge
Hon. Leonard P. Stark
Name and Title ofJudge
*Insert 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 l ofAct of Sept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).

Case 1:08-cr-00105-JJF

Document 14

Filed 07/28/2008

Page 1 of 1