Free Complaint - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:07-cr-0011,7qGI\/IS Document 1 Filed 08/15/2007 Page 1 of 4
AD (Rey. 12/93) Criminal Complaint E
It In United States District Court
. ` For the District of Delaware
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Criminal Complaint
v.
1 CASE NUMBER: 07- /52./V] .
STEPHEN GOODMAN, ,
Defendant ‘
I, the undersigned complainant, being duly swom, state the following is true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief. On or about Auggst 15, 2007 in the District of Delaware, Defendant STEPHEN GOODNIAN
did
knowingly possess in and affecting interstate com1nerce,_a firearm, after having been convicted of a felony crime
punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year,
in violation of Title 18 United States Code, Section(s) 922{gg ll and 924(a3g2}.
I further state that I am a(n) Special Agent, ATF and that this complaint is based
Official Title
on the following facts: F [ L E D i
See attached Affidavit i `
Aus 1 tl 2007 y
U.S. DiS-TR1Cl' COURT
Continued on the attached sheet and made a part hereof: Yes Di§LB.iQi.9f.DELAWARE
i Jason Kusheba `
Special Agent, ATF
Sworn to before me and subscribed in my presence,
August 15, 2007 at Wilmington, DE
Date City and State g
Honorable Mary Pat Thynge ’ _
United States Magistrate Judge ` · _
Name a nee er Judicial career igmmre Ort l ornca

Case 1 :07-cr-00117-GIVIS Document 1 Filed 08/15/2007 Page 2 of 4
1, Jason M. Kusheba, being duly swom, state as follows:
l. I am a Special Agent with the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
(ATF) and have been so employed for over six years. During that time, my duties have
included the investigation of firearms offenses at both the State and Federal levels. Your
Affiant is currently assigned to the Operation Disarm Task Force and has been so assigned
since October, 2003. During the course of your affiant’s law enforcement career, your affiant
has received law enforcement training on the investigation of firearms offenses on over fifty
occasions. Your affiant has participated in over one hundred investigations of Hrearms
offenses and participated in the seizure of over fifty firearms. Your affiant has also had over
one hundred conversations with police officers and Federal agents about the facts and
circumstances of firearms offenses. Your affiant has been employed as a law enforcement
officer in various capacities since 1997.
2. Unless otherwise stated, the information in this affidavit is based upon your affiant’s personal
knowledge.
3. The seizure of all the below stated evidence occurred on August 15, 2007, in the City of
Wilmington, State and District of Delaware, as stated to me by Wilmington Police Officer
James MacColl who has personal knowledge of the stated facts and who has related the
below listed facts from the Wilmington Police Department to your affiant. Officer MacColl
has been employed as a Wilmington Police Officer for approximately 2 years and has been
and is currently assigned to patrol division. During his time as a police officer, Officer
MacColl has been involved in numerous arrests involving firearms violations.
4. On or about August 15, 2007, Officer MacColl and Officer James DeLeo were working a
"quality of life” patrol assignment in the northeast section of the city of Wilmington, DE.
Both officers were wearing full police uniforms and driving a marked Wilmington Police
Crown Victoria. Officer MacColl was the driver of the vehicle and Officer DeLeo was the
passenger.
5. On or about the same date, at approximately 0222 hours, Officers MacColl and DeLeo were
traveling southbound in the 23 00 block of North Jessup Street, when they observed a male
riding a bicycle traveling eastbound on East 23rd Street toward N. Jessup Street. The black
male was later identified as the defendant, Stephen Goodman.
6. Officers observed the defendant turn southbound from East 23rd Street onto North Jessup
Street approximately % block in front of their vehicle. Officers observed the defendant look
over his shoulder at the officers, at which time, he took his right hand off the handle bar and
placed it in front of himself as if he was attempting to conceal something and started to
accelerate. Both Officers observed that the bicycle was not equipped with a light on the front
of it, and they attempted to stop the defendant. Officer MacColl stated that it was a violation
to be operating a bicycle at night without a light.

Case 1 :07-cr-00117-GIVIS Document 1 Filed 08/15/2007 Page 3 of 4
7. Officer MacColl pulled along the right side of the bicycle and gave the defendant verbal
commands to stop to which he did not comply. At the same time, Officer MacColl observed
the defendant’s right hand on top of his shirt, holding something, near the front, right side, of
his waist band.
8. The defendant then turned eastbound on East 22nd Street and attempted to cut in between two
cars parked on the north side of the street. At that time, the defendant lost control of the
bicycle and fell off hitting the ground face first. VVhen the defendant hit the ground, Officers
MacColl and DeLeo observed a black in color handgun fall from the area where the
defendant’s right hand was on his waistband and slide across the street. Officer MacColl
stated that the firearm was clearly illuminated by the headlights of their patrol vehicle as well
as by street lights. The defendant then fled on foot and was apprehended by Officer MacColl
approximately 2 blocks away. The defendant was arrested with approximately 1 gram of
plant-like material in his right rear pocket that field tested positive for Marijuana.
9. Upon seeing the handgun fall from the defendant’s waistband area, Officer DeLeo
immediately recovered the firearm which was determined to be a Bryco; model 48; .380-
caliber pistol. The firearm was loaded with five (5) .380 caliber rounds in the magazine and
one round loaded in the chamber. On or about the same date, your affiant examined the
aforementioned firearm and determined that it was in fact a Bryco; model 48; .380-caliber
pistol; with serial number 969603.
l0. Upon seeing Officers recovering the firearm, the defendant spontaneously stated that the
firearm wasn’t on him and all he had was a bag of marijuana. After having been read his
Miranda warnings the defendant stated that he only ran because he was wanted for violating
the terms of his probation and denied having possession of the aforementioned firearm.
ll. Your affiant reviewed the computer criminal history information for the defendant from the
Delaware Justice l.nforrnation System (DELJIS) and the National Crime information Center
(NCIC) and learned that the defendant has a prior felony conviction for Burglary in the First
Degree from on or about May l2, 2003 in the New Castle County Superior Court for the
State of Delaware, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year. The
defendant also has a prior felony conviction for Receiving Stolen Property (over $1000) from
on or about June 25, 2003 in the New Castle County Superior Court for the State of
Delaware, a crime punishable by imprisorrrnent for a term exceeding one year. Your affiant
also learned that, at the time ofthe defendant’s arrest, he had outstanding warrants in the
State of Delaware for Robbery in the First Degree and for violating the terms his probation.
12. From you affiant’s training and experience, and from prior discussions with ATF Agents who
are expertly trained and experienced in determining the interstate nexus of firearms, your
affiant knows that the above mentioned firearm was manufactured in a state other than
Delaware. As such, its possession in Delaware would have necessarily required that the
firearm had crossed state lines prior to its possession in Delaware, and thus the possession of
that firearm in Delaware affected interstate commerce.

Case 1 :07-cr-00117-GIVIS Document 1 Filed 08/15/2007 Page 4 of 4
i 13. Based upon your affiant’s training and experience and visual inspection of the firearm, your
affiant submits that there is probable cause to believe that the above-mentioned seized
firearm contained the frame and receiver of a firearm, and that the firearm appeared to be
capable of expelling a projectile by action of an explosive.
14. Wherefore, based upon your affiant’s training and experience, your affiant submits that there
is probable cause to believe that the defendant violated Title 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g) and
924(a)(2) by possessing in and affecting interstate commerce a firearm, after having
previously been convicted of a felony crime punishable by imprisonment for a term
exceeding one year, and respectfully requests that the Court issue a Criminal Complaint
charging that offense.
rwfhsvx
Jaso M. Kusheba
Special Agent, ATF
Sworn to and subscribed in my presence
This 15th day of August, 2007
/ - a *3 `
l - a .`• Mary Pat
_ pv States Magistrate Judge
mit rict of Delaware

Case 1:07-cr-00117-GMS

Document 1

Filed 08/15/2007

Page 1 of 4

Case 1:07-cr-00117-GMS

Document 1

Filed 08/15/2007

Page 2 of 4

Case 1:07-cr-00117-GMS

Document 1

Filed 08/15/2007

Page 3 of 4

Case 1:07-cr-00117-GMS

Document 1

Filed 08/15/2007

Page 4 of 4