Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :07-mj-00169 Document 6 Filed O9/O4/2007 Page 1 of 2
% AO 472 (Rev. l2!03) Order of Detention Pending Trial
i
District of I
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA »
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL I
John Gramlich Case Number: 07-169M
Defendant
In accordance with the Bail Reform 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 (l) 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 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. § 3l56(a)(4). I
Q an offense for which the maximum sentence is life imprisonment or death.
I:] an offense for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed in
vit
Q a felony that was committed after the defendant had been convicted of two or more prior federal offenses described in 18 U.S.C.
§ 3 l42(f`)(l)(A)-(C), or comparable state or local offenses. 2
[1 (2) The offense described in finding (1) was committed while the defendant was on release pending trial for a federal, state or local offense. V
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. (1), (2) and (3) establish a rebuttable presumption that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the I
safety of (an) other person(s) and the community. I further find that the defendant ` resum tio , Q
_ Alternative Findings (A) aw iwy "’ M M·’*< W dow 0.·;·é¢»¢ _
M (1) er is p o abl au t b e th f d t S m i 0 11 6: €c~{¤·9»··p Q Z·?S`2§{'q}m} { pg- Q
I
E (2) The defendant has not rebutted the presumption established by finding l that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure
the appearance of the defendant as required and the safety of the community. _ E
Alternative Findings (B) F l |__ E D
(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 com unity.
· — * H .
e
| THICT COURT _
DEZJRICT OF D l. ‘ " Q (
Part II——Writter1 Statement of Reasons for Detention .
I 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 l
Based on the proffers of the parties, the affidavit attached to the Criminal Complaint, and other information provided to the Court by the
Probation Office, the Court finds that the defendant has failed to rebut the statutory presumption that no combination of conditions could
reasonably assure the safety of the community between now and the time of trial and that the Defendant would appear for all Court events in this Q
matter. .
The Court has reached these conclusions based on the following findings and for the following reasons: L
the nature and circumstances ofthe offense: the Defendant is accused of receipt, distribution, and possession of more than 600 images of child ?
pornography, including images depicting torture and rape of identifiable minor victims. He has admitted to downloading such materials from the ‘
internet for more than one year. As a result, he now faces the potential of a mandatory minimum sentence of five years imprisonment and a .
guideline range of close to 20 years imprisonment, in addition to the possibility of additional charges. I
the wei ht of the evidence: Defendant has admitted to at least a portion ofthe alleged conduct and waived his right to a probable cause hearing. I
the histo and characteristics of the Defendant: Defendant has no criminal history, has lived in the same location for approximately four years, has I
steady employment with the United States Air Force, has the support of his parents (although they live far away, in New York and Florida), and has ‘
no history of substance abuse.
the nature and seriousness of the dan er to the communi that would be osed b the Defendanfs release: as Congress has determined, offenses .
involving child pornography pose a serious danger to the community.
l

Case 1 :07-mj—OO169 Document 6 Filed O9/O4/2007 Page 2 of 2
% AO 472 (Rev. 12/03) Order of Detention Pending Trial
Part IlI—Directions Regarding Detention E
The defendant is committed to the custody of the Attomey General or his designated representative for confinement in a corrections facility I
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
attomey for the Government, the person in charge of the corrections facility s l deliver the defendant to the United States marshal for the purpose l
of an ap earance in connection with a court proceeding. Q
§QSt}Q_.,_)g_/Ul \¤¤"r Q/XA, t ,
Date Signature ofJudge
Honorable Leonard P. Stark
Name and Title ofJudge
*Insert as applicable: (a) Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 er seq.); (b) Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (2l U.S.C. § 951 .
er seq.); or (c) Section 1 ofAct of Sept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).

Case 1:07-mj-00169

Document 6

Filed 09/04/2007

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-mj-00169

Document 6

Filed 09/04/2007

Page 2 of 2