Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :07-cr-00028-JJF Document 24 Filed 04/23/2007 Page 1 of 2
tes AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial
District of Delaware
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTI(2N_ PENDING TRIAL
Jonathan Ewell Case C {L /2/%- Gi]
Defendant
in accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142(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 of violence 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 ofimprisonment often years or more is prescribed in
*
Q a felony that was committed after the defendant had been convicted oftwo 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 five 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)
X (1) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense
X for which a maximum term ofimprisonment often years or more is prescribed in 21 USC §§ 841 846 .
Q under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).
X (2) The defendant has not rebutted the presumption established by finding 1 that no condition or combination of conditions 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
1 End that the credible testimony and information submitted at the hearing establishes by clear and convincing evidence a prepon-
derance ofthe evidence: Defendant is charged with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute over 50 gr of cocaine base and possession with
intent to distribute more than 50 gr. of cocaine base. There are no conditions or combination thereof that will reasonably assure defendant’s appear-
ance as required and the safety ofthe community because:
1. The evidence against defendant is substantial in that 125 gr of warm crack was found on his person.
2. The rebuttable presumption applies to this matter. Defendant was with a convicted felon from out of state who was on bail for a drug related
charge in MD at the time ofhis arrrest.
3. Although his mother offered her residence and to serve as TP custodian, at the time of his arrest, defendant was residing with his mother.
4. Defendant has not been employed since April 2003 for an injury sustained at work.
5. Defendant has been found guilty ofthe following offenses in MD: reckless endangennent, 2"" degree assault with that probationary term closed as
"unsatisfactoy.
l""`.‘Z"—·—-—
: 1- 5 E? [_]
1 [-....-.._.Z‘..-§;..____
t g APH r. J 200/ 5 1
2 s i a
T Q '=.f-_ .‘ ·:E·r*}§`r` TT
¢ j[‘_:__*·3_;_ f-TH.: wai I

Case 1 :07-cr-00028-JJF Document 24 Filed 04/23/2007 Page 2 of 2
% AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial
Part III-Directions Regarding Detention
The defendant is committed to the custody ofthe Attomey General or his designated representative for confinement in a corrections facility separate,
to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being helcl 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
Govemment, the person in charge ofthe corrections facility shall deliver the defendantto • ited States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in
connection with a court proceeding. / `
b
é. eamdnlk
Date • .S'ig:anttu·e ofjudicia
Mary Pat Thynge, Mag ate udge
Name and Title ofJudicial Omcer
*1nsert 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 of Sept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).