iss AO 472 (Rev. I2/O3) Order ofDetention Pending Trial
District of
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
Remigio Camacho, Case Number; 07—l66—UNA
Defendant
In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, IS USC. § 3l4l2(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 (I) The defendant is charged with an offense described in IS U.S.C. § 3 l42(f)(I) 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 dehned in IS U.S.C. § 3I56(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 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 IS USC.
§ 3I42(f)(I)(A)-(C), or comparable state or local offenses.
Q (2) The offense described in finding (I) 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 (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 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 term of imprisonment often years or more is prescribed in 2l USC Section SAI .
under IS U.S.C. § 924(c).
X (2) l`he defendant has not rebutted the presumption established by Ending I that no condition or combination ofconditions will reas p , v · ·` ··
the appearance ofthe defendant as required and the safety ofthe community. F ' L E D
Alternative Findings (B)
Q (I) 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 comn unity. yn .- _ F., i
[im, I .t 20u/
I - t .‘ D D ‘ I
Part II—Written Statement of Reasons for Detention
2 · · a .· · i : : · · : *2 : . :·· ze -1-c. -:2. : ..-2.: ElClearandconvitlcingevidence Cl aprepon—
derance ofthe evidence that
Based on the information before the Court, including that provided by the probation office as well as the parties by proffer during the detention
hearing, and the afhdavit supporting the complaint, the Court Ends that the Defendant has failed to rebut the statutory presumption that no
combination ofconditions could reasonably assure the safety ofthe community between now and the time oftrial and that the Defendant would
appear for all Court events in this matter.
The Court has reached these conclusions based on the following findings and for the following reasons;
the nature and circumstances ofthe offense: the Defendant is accused ofdistributing methamphetamine, marijuana, and possession of firearms in
furtherance ofdrug distribution felonies on two separate occasions in recent months. Defendant faces substantial prison time if he is convicted
ofany ofthese offenses, including mandatory minimums of up to ten years.
rgeight of the evidence: is strong. The affidavit of probable cause details interactions between a conhdential source and the Defendant arranging
several transactions involving drugs and guns.
the history and characteristics ofthe Defendant: The Defendant has long—term ties to the community, having lived here for approximately 25 years.
Until recently, he was e mployed. I-le has no criminal history and is a naturalized citizen.
the nature and seriousness of the danger to the community that would be posed by the Defendants release: the Defendant had access to drugs and
guns, both of which pose aserious danger to the community.
Case 1 :07-cr-00166-JJF Document 10 Filed 12/17/2007 Page 2 of 2
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 ofthe 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 ofan appearance
in connection with a court proceeding. Q .
QQ sg hg dl *7 `I»¤¤··1 ·@‘\_,» ·
Date Srgnalure of Judge
Leonard P. Stark U.S. Magistrate
Name and Ti`:/e of Judge
tlnsert as applicable; (a) Controlled Substances Act (2l U.S.C. § 80l ez seq.); (b) Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (2i U.S.C. § 95l
er seq.); or (c) Section l ofAct of Sept. i5, l98O (2l U.S.C. § 955a).
Case 1:07-cr-00166-JJF
Document 10
Filed 12/17/2007
Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cr-00166-JJF
Document 10
Filed 12/17/2007
Page 2 of 2
United States Free Forms
Canada Free Forms
United Kingdom Free Forms
Australia Free Forms