Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :08-cr-00094-SLR Document 7 Filed 06/10/2008 Page 1 of 1
Q AO 472 (Rev. 3f86) Order of Detention Pending Trial

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
District of Delaware
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
JOSHUA C . BE'! Case 08_9 FM
Defendant
In accordance with the Bail Rcfonn Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3l42(f), a detention hearing has been held. I conclude that thc following facts require the
detention of the defendant pending trial in this ease.
Part I—Findings of Fact
Q (1) The defendant is charged with an offense described in IS U.S.C. § 3l42(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 IS 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 prescribed in
i
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.
§ 3 l42(f)(l)(A)-(C), or comparable state or local offenses.
Q (2) The offense described in finding (I) was committed while thc defendant wm 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 (I).
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 thc dcfendant has not rebutted this presumption.
Alternative Findings (A)
(I) There is probable cause to believe that the dcfendant has committed an offense
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 rebuttcd the presumption established by finding I that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure
thc appearance of the defendant as required and the safety ofthe community.
Alternative Findings (B)
(I) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear.
(2) There is a serious risk that thc defendant will endanger the safety of another person or the community.
Part [I—Written Statement of Reasons for Detention
I find that the credible testimony and infomiation submitted at the hearing establishes by clear and convincing evidence a prepon-
derance of the evidence: Defendant is charged with possession of a firearm by a felon. At the present time, he does not contest detention. In addition
thc following facts support dcfcndant’s detention:
1. Defendant uses prescription mediation percocet which he purchases off the street- he also drinks while under the influence of percocet, but claims
not to have an addiction to the medication.
Defendant has been unemployed since he quit his job that he held for two years over personal reasons. He has made little effort to find employment
since then.
3. Defendant was convicted of felony theft in 2002; convicted of possession of a firearm by a person prohibited in 2003; convicted of conspiracy in
2005 which original charges included possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony; he was charged with possession of a fiream and
conspiracy 2d in 2005; presently pending are failure to have auto insurance, possession of burglary tools, attempted burglary. Defendant had two
recent FTA appears in 2007 and a record of failures on state probation. He has two prior convictions for possession of a firearm by a person
prohibted, one of which involved shot being fired and the use of a machette. During that incident, the weapon was found on dcfendant along with
MJ.
4. Defendant claims that he lives with his mother. His mother initially denied that he resided with hcr, ut s ortl efrfc the d?ntiB hearing
claimed that he does, but that she was unaware since he comes to her home during the day while she is t work. Th » - · - - · ' e . ze 'onabl
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 1:08-cr-00094-SLR

Document 7

Filed 06/10/2008

Page 1 of 1