Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :07-mj-00119-IVIPT Document 6 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 1 of 2
m AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of`Detention Pending Trial
UNITED S TATES DISTRICT Couar
District of Delaware
UNITED STATES OF ANIERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
.. E], -
CSG Oil- l|°iM-pn¤r
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 (1) The defendant is charged with an offense deseribed in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(1) and has been convicted of a Q federal offense Q state
or local offense that would have been a fcderal offense if a circumstance giving rise to federal jurisdiction had existed that is
Q a crime ofviolence as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 3l56(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 prescrihed in
*
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.
§ 3l42(f)(l)(A)-(C), or comparable state or local offenses.
Q (2) The offense described in finding (l) was committed while the defendant was on release pending trial for a federal, state or local offense.
[I (3) A period of not more than five years has elapsed since the I] date of conviction I:] release of the 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 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)
(1) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense
for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten 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 l that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure
the appearance of the defendant as required and the safety of the community.
Alternative Findings (B)
IA) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear.
1A) 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 find that the credible testimony and information submitted at the hearing establishes by clear and convincing evidence a prepon-
derance of the evidence: JJ4y·,‘y;£..»ié»·;)y}’¢6·?·*·1@-"*#¤g Au! g,.} &;,éy(044g,,,g¤"-2
éi A'}/E {pps?/£°Wl
_ ` __ 4 · •·¢.»
M"’7"/"?·{’?""9*7/ é" “éI;“§
. . . r *9; J4¢·g‘
/1/.%··¤»¤»· /»24m»a»-Crxfg *%’”‘-***47 % ’
5/%, / A¢¢¢r74¢%// JW/Wvtffz /6772: Auf Z-#
WM

Case 1 :07-mj-00119-IVIPT Document 6 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 2 of 2
as AO 472 (Rev. 3/36) Order ot`Detention Pending Trial
Part III—Directions Regarding Detention
The defendant is committed to the custody ofthe Attorney General or his designated representative for eonilnement 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 dcfensc counsel. On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the
Government, the person in charge ofthe eorreetions facility shall deliver the defend .e — · United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in
connection with a court proceeding. A A /
Vglg/?' _ _ ,4 4
ate Il ‘`‘'` ` Signr1!ureof c O_;j‘Ecer
_ Mary Pat Thynge, Magistrate Judge
Nome and T itle of Judicial Ojjficer
*Insert as applicable: (a) Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.); (b) Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. § 951 et
seq.); or (c) Section 1 of Act of Sept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).