Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :O7—cr—OOO35-SLR Document 10 Filed O4/O4/2007 Page 1 of 2
% AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
District of _ Delaware
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
Irvin]. Lewis Case _
Defendant
ln accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3l42(f), a detention hearing has been held. 1 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. § 3142(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. § 3156(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.
§ 3 l42(f)(l)(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 ofnot 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. (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 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 1 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 ofanothcr person or the community.
Part II—Written Statement of Reasons for Detention
lnnd 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, but reserve the right to do so at a later date which was granted. ln addition,
defendant should be detained because:
1. His criminal history begins at age 15 in 1993 and includes assault 2"° , assault 3'd, receiving stolen property. ln 1997 at age 19 defendant was
charged with resisting arrest and resisting a police office. 1-le failed to appear for which a capias was issued. l—le was eventually found guilty of
disorderly conduct. ln 1999, defendant was found guilty ofintent to deliver a narcotic controlled substance (schedule ll). Within a month ofhis
sentence he was found VOP, 5 month later he was charged with escape from corrections for which a capias was issued and eventually cleared a
year later. 1N December 2000 he was found VOP. ln June 2000, a warrant was issued for failure to appear on the charges ofpossession ofa non-
narcotic. That capias was cleared 7 months later and he was found guilty of possession ofdrug paraphernalia. In November 2006, he was found
guilty ofpossession ofa deadly weapon by person prohibited. Four months later he is facing a related charge in federal court (the present charge)
ofpossession ofa firearm by a felon.
in ‘$"‘¢`·*··*
I r i A li; D i
I 1""“"·-····-···-— ···~- .. -.._._. :
1 { li;"` ·· ._ P i E
I l .- '
1 1.. . ._.. . - i =
E l.=.ri s¤.·€-.1. ‘l·Q`i {viii at _ 1
¢ ... . ..;;*.*2--.?;* > W l

Case 1:O7—cr—OOO35-SLR Document 10 Filed O4/O4/2007 Page 2 of 2
@1 AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order ofDetention 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 defendant to the United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in
connection with a court proceeding.
i
April 2, 2007
Date Signature of./url" I flcer
Mary Pat Thynge, N agistrate Judge
Name and Title 0fJudicia/ Omcer
*1nscrt 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 ofAct ofSept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).