Free Order of Detention - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:00-cr-00256-EWN

Document 119

Filed 10/09/2007

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Case No.: 00-cr-00256-EWN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff, v. ROBERT JOHN ROYBAL, Defendant.

ORDER OF DETENTION THIS MATTER came before the Court for a detention hearing on October 5, 2007. Present were the following: James Allison, Assistant United States Attorney, Matthew Golla, counsel for the defendant, and the defendant. The Court reviewed the entire court file and considered the arguments of counsel. The Court has concluded, by a preponderance of the evidence, that no condition or combination of conditions of release will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant, based upon the attached findings. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney General or their 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; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant is to be afforded a reasonable opportunity to consult confidentially with defense counsel; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that upon order of this Court or on request of an attorney for the United States of America, the person in charge of the corrections facility shall deliver defendant to the United States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with this proceeding. DATED and ENTERED this 9th day of October, 2007. By the Court: s/ Craig B. Shaffer Craig B. Shaffer United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:00-cr-00256-EWN

Document 119

Filed 10/09/2007

Page 2 of 3

United States v. Robert John Roybal Case Number 00-cr-00256-EWN

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW and REASONS FOR ORDER OF DETENTION This matter comes before the court on a Petition for Issuance of Arrest Warrant for Violation of Supervised Release and Warrant for Arrest of Probationer/Supervised Release. The Petition alleges that on December 22, 2000, the defendant was placed on supervision by District Judge Nottingham, with the special condition that the defendant submit to testing and treatment for drug abuse as directed by the supervising officer. During a hearing on October 5, 2007, the defendant waived his right to a preliminary hearing under Rule 32.1 of the Federal of Criminal Procedure. Based upon the facts alleged in the Petition and in light of the defendant's waiver, the court finds that probable cause exists to believe that the defendant violated one or more conditions of his release. Under Rule 32.1, the court "may release or detain the [defendant] under 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a) pending further proceedings. The burden of establishing that the person will not flee or pose a danger to any other person or to the community rests with the [defendant]." In making my findings of fact, I have taken judicial notice of the information set forth in the Petition for Issuance of Arrest Warrant and the entire court file. Weighing all of the information presently before the court, I find that defendant has failed to sustain his burden under Rule 32.1. I specifically note the Petition indicates that on June 9, 2006, the defendant admitted to seven violations of his supervised release. Based upon those alleged violations, the District Court modified the terms of supervised release to require the defendant to spend up to 180 days in an approved community corrections facility. The defendant was released from community corrections after a period of 90 days. The Petition alleges that the defendant tested positive for methamphetamine on or about August 17, 2007. The defendant subsequently admitted to ingesting that controlled substance. It further appears that the defendant failed to participate in drug treatment and to report to his supervising officer as directed on August 16, 2007. The Petition also alleges that the defendant failed to participate in drug treatment on August 31, September 16 and September 17, 2007. Given the defendant's prior violations and his more recent failures to comply with the conditions of supervised release imposed by the District Court, I find there is no combination of conditions that I could set that would properly assure the defendant's appearance at further proceedings in this case.

Case 1:00-cr-00256-EWN

Document 119

Filed 10/09/2007

Page 3 of 3