Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :07-cr-00134-SLR Document 11 Filed 10/24/2007 Page 1 of 2
% AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial
District of Delaware
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENT ION PENDING TRIAL
Marques Comer Case C I J A
Defendant `l I
In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142(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. § 3142(f)(l) 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 defined in 18 U.S.C. § 3 l56(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
>l<
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(t)(l)(A)-(C), or comparable state or local offenses.
Q (2) The offense described in tinding (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 tive 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 ofconditions 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)
(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.
Alternative Findings (B)
(1) 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 II—Written Statement of Reasons for Detention
I Gnd that the credible testimony and infomwation submitted at the hearing establishes by X clear and convincing evidence X a prepon-
derance ofthe evidence: Defendant is charged with possession ofa firearm and ammunition by a felon in violation of 18 USC §§ 922 & 924. The
court found that there are no conditions or combination thereof that will reasonable assure defendant’s appearance as required and the safety of the
community on the following bases:
1. the evidence against defendant is strong. the weapon was found in his room ofhis parents home and defendant admitted that the rifle and ammo
were his. His admission is contested.
2. Although defendant is a lifelong resident ofDe with substantial ties to this community, within the past 6 months he has had two FTAs.
3. Defendant has held two positions of employment — one part time for the past 6 months and the other full time employment for the past 9 months.
4. Defendant attended Pathways counseling for substance abuse treatment— he admits that alcohol is his drug ofchoice (began drinking at age 13).
He claims that he has been sober for 8 months.
5. At the time of his arrest defendant was on state probation for DUI (arrest for DUI occurred in April 2007 for which he was required to undergo
substance abuse treatment). Previously he was convicted ofconspiracy 2"d (pled down from attempted robbery- defendant’s co-defendant was his
brother who I still incarcerated for the offense). In April 2007 he was also arrested for maintaining a vehicle for keeping controlled substances
for which he pled guilty (also on state probation for this offense). In May 2007, he was arrested and charged w' ` " if. - _ s
presently pending in New Castle CCP. Further besides the two recent FTAs, defendant has two other FTAS ant a total of35 arriestsicapi cs.
Defendant is only 24 years old.
l 0cr 2 4 zum?
l1.S. DISFRICI CUURT
|;i;3TR-CT UF t;·ELAw#.RE

Case 1:07—cr—00134-SLR Document 11 Filed 10/24/2007 Page 2 of 2
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 oppoitunity 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 tot ` es marshal for the purpose of an appearance in
connection with a court proceeding.
October 24, 2007 li _ -
Date Signature 0fJudicia/ Oyfic
ary Pat Thynge, Magistrate dge
'ame and Title 0fJudicial Ojicer
*insert as applicable: (a) Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 ct seq.); (b) Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. § 951 ez
seq.); or (c) Section l ofAct ofSept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 95521).

Case 1:07-cr-00134-SLR

Document 11

Filed 10/24/2007

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-cr-00134-SLR

Document 11

Filed 10/24/2007

Page 2 of 2