Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :07-cr-00012-GIVIS Document 9 Filed 01/24/2007 Page 1 of 2
@1 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
Jorge Manuel Mejias Case Kg'}, [Z, (jrdrq- _
Defendant
In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), a detention heariig 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)(1) 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 federaljurisdiction 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
>l<
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)(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 Hve 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 ofconditions 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 1 that no condition or combination ofconditions will reasonably assure
the appearance ofthe defendant as required and the safety ofthe community.
Alternative Findings (B)
X (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 find that the credible testimony and information submitted at the hearing establishes by clear and convincing evidence X a prepon-
derance ofthe evidence: Defendant did not oppose the government’s motion for detention, but reserved the right to revisit detention in the future.
which was granted. In addition to the defendant’s waiver, the court finds that the evidence against defendant that he illegally reentered the US after
deportation to be strong. Defendant was deported previously on June 24, 2001 and against in 2002. He was also convicted of criminal
impersonation and delivery ofa narcotic in 2005 in DE and forgery 2d in 2003. In light ofthe information contained herein, the court finds that
there are no conditions of combination thereofthat will reasonably assure defendant’s appearance as required.
1 1 '. » _ _
1 . l
r I l
, l 1
T U ",_ _` . .4.; IQ ···—-I
I y _ ,._.;;_?-LL, _. .p_{IEI_[.

Case 1 :07-cr—OOO12-GIVIS Document 9 Filed O1/24/2007 Page 2 of 2
A <& 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§zm`t` to {he ` States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in
connection with a court proceeding. -* n _ j
1/24/07 'H i 4 .»+
Date " Signature 0f.h1d' im' zccr
Mary Pat Thynge, Magistrate Judge
Name and Title ofjudicial Ojicer
*1nsert as applicable: (a) Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.); (b) Controlled Substances lmport and Export Act (21 U.S.C. § 951 ez
seq.); or (c) Section 1 ofAct ofSept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).