Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :07-cr-00041-GIVIS Document 9 Filed O4/O4/2007 Page 1 of 2


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
District of _ Delaware
UNTTED STATES OF ANIERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
Timothy Watson Case C Q _ __ C9
Defendant Lk \
In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142(t), a detention hearin 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. § 3I42(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 I56(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 often years or more is prescribed 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.
§ 3142(f)(1)(A)-(C), or comparable state or local offenses.
Q (2) The offense described in finding (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 Eve 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. (I), (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 cornrnunity. I further hnd 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 l 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 find that the credible testimony and information submitted at the hearing establishes by X clear and convincing evidence X a prepon-
derance ofthe evidence: that there are no conditions or combination thereofthat will reasonably assure defendant’s appearance as required and the
safety ofthe community. Defendant did not oppose detention at this time, but reserved the right to a hearing at a later date which was granted. In
addition, defendant should be detained for the following reasons:
1. Defendant is unemployed since February 2007, having held that job for the past 5-6 months. He could not recall any other employment.
2. Defendant is an admitted heroin user since age I5 and cocaine since age 20. I—lc has undergone drug treatment and claimed that he has stopped
using. However, he was on state probation at the time of his arrest for the federal offense of possession ofa tireann by a convicted felon, 18 USC
§922 & 924. His state probation officer is planning to file VOP petition for matters unrelated to the federal offense, including failure to appear,
failure to reside at reported residence and illegal drug use. He has pending in JP Court 20 a number of misdemeanor offenses. His prior convictions
include: March 2004, possession ofa narcotic schedule Il controlled substance, March 2004 criminal impersonation, October 2002 assault 2““ & 3'd
in a detention facility (halfway house) for which he was found VOP on 3 occasions between May 2003 and September 2004, possession of
ofa controlled substance schedule Il in March 2001 and found VOP in Sept. 2001, Oct. 2001, May 2002 and October 2002, January 1999 escape
after conviction and VOP; another VOP in March 1998 which resulted in 9 months partial conhnement.

Case 1 :07-cr-00041-GIVIS Document 9 Filed O4/O4/2007 Page 2 of 2
<*:s AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial
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 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 ofthe corrections facility shall deliver the defen United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in
connection with a court proceeding.
April 2: 2007 ‘ `
Date Signature of./u Meer
Mary Pat Thynge, i iagistrate Judge
Name and Title of./udicial Omcer
*Insert as applicable: (a) Controlled Substances Act (2l U.S.C. § 80] ei seq.); (b) Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (2l U.S.C. § 951 et
seq.); or (c) Section l ofAct ofSept. I5, l980 (2l U.S.C. § 955a).