Free Order of Detention - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

3 j·:"_E¤ ___ LODGED
U N ITED STATES DISTRICT COU R p- RECEVED —· °°PY
DISTRICT OF ARIZONA i 19 mus

` A . .. so l-ti»»····l;-;i¢t ;<§>Ll‘lf
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA '·*·";_.,=_|,__ _ 51,°,.»._l-¢;;_:i;)((,.tl
v. ORDER OF DETEN _f'ENDlNGw[RlA§§_fj§Tjj
Robert Edward Alan DuBois Case Number: CR 02-00307-001-Pl-lX—EHC
In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), a detention hearing has been held. I conclude that the fotlowing facts
are established: {Check one or both, as applicable.)
I] by clear and convincing evidence the defendant is a danger to the community and require the detention of the defendant
pending trial in this case.
w by a preponderance of the evidence the defendant is a flight risk and require the detention of the defendant pending trial in
' this case.
PART I -- FINDINGS OF FACT
El (1) The defendant has been convicted of a (federal offense)(state or local offense that would have been a federal
offense if a circumstance giving rise to federal jurisdiction had existed) that is
El a crime of violence as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 3156(a)(4).
III an offense for which the maximum sentence is life imprisonment or death.
I:] an offense for which a maximum term of imprisonment often years or more is prescribed in 1
I;] 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.
El (2) The offense described in finding 1 was committed while the defendant was on release pending trial for a federal,
state or local offense.
III (3) A period of not more than five years has elapsed since the (date of conviction)(reIease of the defendant from
imprisonment) for the offense described in finding 1.
I] (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
III (1) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense
I:] for which a maximum term of imprisonment often years or more is prescribed in 2
E under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)
EI (2) The defendant has not rebutted the presumption established by finding 1 that no condition or combination of
conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant as required and the safety of the community.
_ j Alternative Findings
}%\ (1) There is a serious risk that the defendant will flee; no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure
the appearance of the defendant as required.
U (2) No condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the safety of others and the community.
I;] (3) There is a serious risk that the defendant will (obstruct or attempt to obstruct justice) (threaten, injure, or intimidate
, a prospe tive witness or juror). _ _ I _
Q (4) I ` “ lcs “ 'XO ‘ ‘ MM "·— ‘ ' " ‘ u l‘~f`\*L. CY
lf s o-me R -
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 of Act of Sept, 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).
zlnsert 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 of Act of Sept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.C. §955a).
Case 2:02-cr-00307-EHC Document 67 Filed 01/1 9/2006 Page 1 of 3

PART It -- WRITTEN STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DETENTION
(Check one or both, as applicable.)
D (1) l find that the credible testimony and information3 submitted at the hearing establishes by clear and convincing
evidence as to danger that:
I:] (2) i find that a preponderance of the evidence as to risk of flight that:
El The defendant has no significant contacts in the District of Arizona.
III The defendant has no resources inthe United States from which he/she might make a bond reasonably calculated
to assure hisfher future appearance.
E1 The defendant has a prior criminal history.
EI There is a record of prior failure to appear in coun as ordered.
EI The defendant attempted to evade law enforcement contact by fleeing from law enforcement.
EI The defendant is facing a minimum mandatory of incarceration and a maximum of
El The defendant does not dispute the information contained in the Pretrial Services Report, except:
III In addition:
The Court incorporates by reference the findings of the Pretrial Services Agency which were reviewed by the Court at the
time of the hearing in this matter.
“ 'The rules conceming admissiblllty of evidence in criminal trials do not apply to the presentation and consideration of information at the [detention] hearing."
18 U.S.C. § 3142(f}. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g) for the factors to be taken Into account.
Page 2 of 3 _ .
Case 2:02-cr-00307-EHC Document 67 Filed O1/19/2006 Page 2 of 3

PART III -- DIRECTIONS REGARDING DETENTION
The defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney General or hislher designated representative for confinement in
a corrections facility separate, tothe 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 of the corrections facility shall deliver the
defendant to the United States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a coun proceeding.
PART IV -- APPEALS AND THIRD PARTY RELEASE
IT IS ORDERED that should an appeal of this detention order be filed with the District Court, it is counseI's responsibility to
deliver a copy of the motion for reviewlreconsideration to Pretrial Services at least one day prior to the hearing set before the District
Court.
lT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if a release to a third party is to be considered, it is counsel‘s responsibility to notify Pretrial
Services sufficiently in advance of the hearing before the District Court to allow Pretrial Services an opportunity to interview and
investigate the potential third party custodian.
DATE: Januagg 19, 2006 ` 4 ‘ ·‘ "
IR NIA A. MATHIS
United States Magistrate Judge
Page 3 of 3 _
Case 2:02-cr-00307-EHC Document 67 Filed O1/19/2006 Page 3 of 3

Case 2:02-cr-00307-EHC

Document 67

Filed 01/19/2006

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:02-cr-00307-EHC

Document 67

Filed 01/19/2006

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:02-cr-00307-EHC

Document 67

Filed 01/19/2006

Page 3 of 3