Free Order of Detention - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :07-cr-00011-JJF Document 8 Filed 02/15/2007 Page 1 of 2
% AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial
UNITED STATES DISTRICT ("OURT
./
District of Delaware
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
Fredy Estuardo-Velasguez Case __ P
Defendant
In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), a detention hearing 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)(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 hzderaljurisdiction had existed that is
Q a crime ofviolence as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 3 156(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
=¢<
n 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 five years has elapsed since the Q date of conviction Q release ofthe defendant from imprisonment
_ _ for the offense described in finding (I).
Q (4) Findings Nos. (I ), (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)
A V (l__) 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 of conditions 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. I F I D
X (2) There is a serious risk that the defendant will endanger the safety of another person or the community —·——
T E I- ‘°Erli'_'|
I —
—;·———¢-—-——··—~»»—L—»—¤—* _ .t.b;1 tf=rc.1o i ri 6 . I
‘ U I: 5'v'l»'·"iQl
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-l
derance ofthe evidence: Defendant is charged with re—entry after deportation. Defendant did not contest detention at this time, but reserved the
right to do so later which was granted. In addition, the court considered the following in determining that defendant is both a risk ofnon-
appearance and a danger to the community:
I. His address/residence is unknown.
2. Defendant apparently has no ties to the community. The only known family is a wife and 3 children who reside somewhere possibly in Puerto ° I
Rico.
3. The evidence against defendant is substantial and strongly shows that he is in this country illegally. He is a citizen ofMexico.
4. the evidence shows that defendant was deported from Texas in 2003 and 2006.
5. While in the US, defendant has a number ofcriminal conviction including 2 for driving under the influence in 2002 and 1999. For the first
offense he was found in VOP and for the second offense he failed to appear at a court hearing. He was also found guilty of driving without a license
in 1999 and found in VOP on that charge in 2002. I-le was eventually discharged from probation for that offense as unimproved. IN 2005-2006,
defendant graduated to more serious offenses including possession ofa deadly weapon during the commission ofa felony, aggravated menancing,. . .
terroristic threatening to which he pled guilty to reduced charges. All convictions have been in DE.

Case 1 :07-cr-00011-JJF Document 8 Filed O2/15/2007 Page 2 of 2
Q AO 472 (Rev. 3/86) Order of Detention Pending Trial
_ Part III—Directions Regarding Detentioin
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 ofthe United States or on request of an attomey for the
Government, the person in charge ofthe corrections facility shall deliver the defendart to the United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in
connection with a court proceeding.
Febmag 15, 2007 --
¤ Date Signature 0fJud[ci _ r er
Mary Pat Thynge, Ma strate Judge
Name and Title of./udicial Oj7cer
*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 0fAct of Sept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).