Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :08-mj—OOO58-UNA Document 7 Filed O3/25/2008 Page 1 of 2


District of Delaware
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
Darrin Burns Case qw SBM
Dejendanr -
In accordance with the Bail Refom1 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. § 3l42(f)(l) and has been convicted of a Q federal offense Q state
or loeal 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. § 3I56(a)(4). '
Q an offense for which the maximum sentence is Iifc imprisonment or death.
Q an offense for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed in
U
Q a felony that was committed after thc defendant had been convicted of two or more prior federal offenses described in 18 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 ofthe defendant from imprisonment
for the offense described in finding (1).
Q (4) Findings Nos. (1), (2) and (3) establish a rebuttable presumption mat 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 (I) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense
X for which a maximum temi of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed in 21 USC § 841 .
X under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e).
Xl:] (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)
(I) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear.
(2) There is a serious risk that the defendant will endanger the safety of another person or the community.
Part H—Written Statement of Reasons for Detention
1 find that the credible testimony and information submitted at the hearing establishes by clear and convincing evidence a prepon-
derance ofthe evidence: At present, defendant does not opposed the govemment’s motion for detention, but reserves the right to do so in the fiiture
which was granted. Although defendant has lived most of his life in DE and his father is a pastor with who he has a close relationship, his last
known employment was in 2006 which ended when he was incarcerated for VOP of state probation. Defendant is presently 30 years old. Although
defendant’s substance abuse history is limited, according to his father, he does not have a problem with using illegal drugs, but rather a problem
with selling them (an honest but not stellar reconnnendation). His criminal history began at age 15 with a juvenile conviction for assault 2d.
Between 1993 to June 1994, defendant had 9 arrests and criminal convictions which included theft over $500, receiving stolen property, terroristic
threatening, offensive touching and VOP. Some of the highlights of his criminal past as an adult include possession of a non-narcotic schedule 1
controlled substance (2001 & 2002 in which defendant was required to serve an additional year of probation), maintaining a vehicle for controlled
substances in February 2001 (for which he had 2 VOPs in 2002 & 2003), delivery of a narcotic schedule IV controlled substance within 1000 feet
ofa school for which he was found in VOP in 2003, 2004 and twice in 2006 (discharged as unimproved), escape 3d from the VOP Center,
possession of drug paraphernalia in 2006, possession with intent to deliver a non-narcotic controlled substance in March 2006 for which he
violated probation in June and August 2007. Defendant has had 25 capiases andfor warrants were issued for his failure to appear for numerous court
appearances. Further several terms of probation have been revoked due to non-compliance with condition ofgsupgrvision. lt must be noted that the
listing of convictions above do NOT include the numerous of offenses that were non-prossq'5 as a resulgjof guilty pleas. D l ‘
; t in g , ii *
E -?._.....,,..,,..,.,g
I E
q MAH 25 ZOQ8
g l
11.5 B1fIlRliZiC0tlili
LM q Q iDiSiéil£(f1;{’itEl.,%WARE

Case 1 :08-mj—OOO58-UNA Document 7 Filed O3/25/2008 Page 2 of 2
® AO 472 (Rev. 3fS6) Order of Detention Pending Trial
Part III--Directions Regarding Detention
The defendant is committed to the custody ofthe Attomey General or his designated representative for eonfinement in a correetions 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 eonsultation with defense counsel. On order of a eourt of the United States or on request of an attorney for the
Govemment, the person in charge of the corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to the United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in
connection with a court proceeding.
March 25, 2008
Date Signature of J f Ojicer
Mary Pat Thynge, Magistrate Judge
Name and Title of Judicial Qjfficer
"Insert as applieables (a) Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 el seq.); (b) Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. § 951 er
seq.); or (c) Seetion 1 0fAct ofSept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).

Case 1:08-mj-00058-UNA

Document 7

Filed 03/25/2008

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:08-mj-00058-UNA

Document 7

Filed 03/25/2008

Page 2 of 2