Free Order on Motion to Detain Pending Trial - District Court of Delaware - Delaware


File Size: 73.1 kB
Pages: 2
Date: October 15, 2007
File Format: PDF
State: Delaware
Category: District Court of Delaware
Author: unknown
Word Count: 967 Words, 5,640 Characters
Page Size: 622 x 792 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ded/39011/7.pdf

Download Order on Motion to Detain Pending Trial - District Court of Delaware ( 73.1 kB)


Preview Order on Motion to Detain Pending Trial - District Court of Delaware
Case 1 :07-cr-00131-JJF Document 7 Filed 10/12/2007 Page 1 of 2
% AO 472 (Rev. I2/O3) Order of Detention Pending Trial 2
U s D c '
District of
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL ‘
Juan Carbajal Magana, I Case Number: 07—I3I-UNA
Defendant ·
In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, IS U.S.C. § 3I42(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 I
Q (I) The defendant is charged with an offense described in 18 U.S.C. § 3l42(1)(l) 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 of violence as defined in 18 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 of ten years or more is prescribed in
at
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 I42(f)( l)(A)-(C), or comparable state or local offenses. i
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) E
Q (I) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense
Q for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed in .
Q under I8 U.S.C. § 924(c). I
Q (2) The defendant has not rebutted the presumption established by finding I that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure -
the appearance of the defendant as required and the safety of the community. g..—..-—·—-T‘-~—---»-r.-.-.......a..........-._ .
Alternative Findings (B) fs l L I
X ( I) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear. W l
X (2) There is a serious risk that the defendant will endanger the safety of another person or the communi . i Tl
i l irvr I ri ’Jl"*fi`2 . 1
I
Qiiiii`? i
l Q QTQMTT fig rigt ;t·-qargsc `
Part II—Written Statement of Reasons for Detention I
l find that the credible testimony and information submitted at the hearing establishes by X clear and convincing evidence X a prepon-
derance of the evidence that
The Defendant waived his right to contest pretrial detention. Based on the information before the Court, including the report of the Probation
Office, the Court finds clear and convincing evidence that no combination of conditions could reasonably assure the safety ofthe community
between now and the time of the Defendants trial. The Court further finds by a preponderance of evidence that no combination of conditions could
reasonably assure 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 of the offense: the Defendant is accused illegal re-entry into the U.S. following deportation.
the weight ofthe evidence: is strong.
the histogy and characteristics of the Defendant; the Defendant was previously deported to Mexico in June 2005 and appears to be in this country
illegally. He has a prior conviction for harassment and stalking and at least one failure to appear. He refused to be interviewed by pretrial services,
so the Court does not have any additional information to reasonably assure it that if released he would not pose a risk of flight or a danger to the
community.
the nature and seriousness of the danger to the community that would be posed by the Defendants releasezthe Defendant poses some danger as he
has a prior conviction for harassment and stalking.

Case 1 :07-cr-00131-JJF Document 7 Filed 10/12/2007 Page 2 of 2
Q AO 472 (Rev. 12/O3) Order ofDetention Pending Trial _
l
Part III-Directions Regarding Detention .
The defendant is committed to the custody ofthe Attomey 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 of the corrections facility shall deliver thedefendant to the United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance .
in connection with a court proceeding. Q 0%/ .
§)(/n,\jlf We >~¤°`»· JDJ; ·

Date Signature of Judge I
Leonard P. Stark U.S. Magistrate
Nome and Title 0f.]udga
*lnsext as applicable; (a) Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.); (b) Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (2] U.S.C. § 951 l
erseq.); or (c) Section 1 ofAct of Sept. 15, 1980 (2l U.S.C. § 955a). ,
l i
V l

Case 1:07-cr-00131-JJF

Document 7

Filed 10/12/2007

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-cr-00131-JJF

Document 7

Filed 10/12/2007

Page 2 of 2