Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :08-cr—OOO67-SLR Document 9 Filed O2/20/2008 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
Whitney Wilson . Case Q % - I Z Nl
Defendant
in accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3l42(f), a detention hearing has been held. I conclude that the following facts require the
detention ofthe 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. § 3 142(f)(1) and has been convicted ofa Q federal offense Q state
or local offense that would have been a federal offense ifa circumstance giving rise to federal jurisdiction had existed that is
Q a crime ofviolence as denned in 18 USC. § 3156(a)(4).
Q an offense for which the maximum sentence is life imprisonment or death.
Q an offense for which a maximum term ofimprisonment often years or more is prescribed in
*
Q a felony that was committed after the defendant had been convicted oftwo or more prior federal offenses described in 18 U.S.C.
§ 3 l42(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 ofthe 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) andthe community. 1 further find that the defendant has not rebutted this presumption.
Alternative Findings (A)
(1) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense
for which a maximum term of imprisonment often years or more is prescribed in .
Q under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). _
Q (2) The defendant has not rebutted the presumption established by finding 1 that no condition or combination ofconditions will reasonably assure
the appearance ofthe defendant as required and the safety ofthe community.
A Alternative Findings (B)
(1) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear. I
(2) There is a serious risk that the defendant will endanger the safety of another person or the community.
° I Part II—Written Statement of Reasons for Detention
[Gnd that the credible testimony and information submitted at the hearing establishes by clear and convincing evidence a prepon-
derance ofthe evidence: Defendant did not contest detention and waived her right to a preliminary hearing. ln addition, defendant has a substantial
and continuous history of substance abuse, despite being on methadone — she continues to abuse illegally obtained controlled substances and has
graduated to prescription medications. She maintains no employment and fails to support her 4 children for which her mother has guardianship.
She does not have a relationship with her children. Her prior convictions are possession ofa non-narcotic in 1995 (family Court), conspiracy
3d and VOP found deliquent in 1996; possession with intent to deliver and maintaining a dwelling for controlled substances 2007 and received
diversion. Despite presently undergoing drug treatment, she is stil using. Further in December 2007 she was found guilty of identity theft. She
attcinpted to flee her residence when federal authorities attempted to effectuate her arrest and she failed to appear on 2 occasions with her state
probation ofhcer because she feared being arrested for the instant offense. A VOP warrant is currently outstanding. As a result, defendant is a
risk of non-appearance.
1 l
. { FEB 21} EOE} ` .
¢-.. iz". if: li ifi: _ I

Case 1:08-cr—OOO67-SLR Document 9 Filed O2/20/2008 Page 2 of 2
AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial
Part III—Directions 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 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 States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in
connection with a court proceeding.
Februag 19, 2008 A/4 ..
Date W Sig I _ zdicial Ojicer
Mary . liynge, Magistrate Judge
Name and Title of./udicial Omcer
*lnsert as applicable: (a) Controlled Substances Act (2l U.S.C. § 801 et seq.); (b) Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (2l U.S.C. § 95l ez
seq.); or (c) Section l ofAct ofSept. I5, 1980 (21 USC. § 955a).

Case 1:08-cr-00067-SLR

Document 9

Filed 02/20/2008

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:08-cr-00067-SLR

Document 9

Filed 02/20/2008

Page 2 of 2