Free Order on Motion to Detain Pending Trial - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :07-cr-00132-SLR Document 9 Filed 10/12/2007 Page 1 of 2 _
res AO 472 (Rev. I2/03) Order of Detention Pending Trial
District of
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
Santo Teodoro Baez Case Number: 07-132-UNA
Defendant
ln accordance with the Bail Reform Act, IS U.S.C. § 3 I42(f), a detention bearing has been held. I conclude that the following facts require the
detention of the defendant pending trial in this case.
Part I-—Findings of Fact
Q ( I) The defendant is charged with an offense described in 18 U.S.C. § 3l42(f)(l) and has been convicted of a Q federal offense Q state
or local offense that would have been a federal offense if a circumstance giving rise to federal jurisdiction had existed - that is
Q a crime of violence as defined in l8 U.S.C. § 3 I 56(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 of ten years or more is prescribed in
t=
Q a felony that was committed after the defendant had been convicted of two or more prior federal offenses described in I8 U.S.C.
§ 3 l42(f)(I )(A)-(C), or comparable state or local offenses.
Q (2) The offense described in finding (I) 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. (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)
Q (I) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense
Q for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed in .
Q under IS U.S.C. § 924(c). U
Q (2) The defendant has not rebutted the presumption established by finding l that no condition or combination·ef~eendj;iojt1 ` na y assure
the appearance ofthe defendant as required and the safety of the community. Er L `“` @ _
Alternative Findings (B) l
X (I) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear. _ _
Q (2) There is a serious risk that the defendant will endanger the safety of another person or the commu ity. Il 2
_ | : OURT_
A [Iii l BICT OF DELAWA __
Part II—-Written Statement of Reasons for Detention
I find that the credible testimony and information submitted at the hearing establishes by I;] clear and convincing evidence X a prepon-
derance ofthe evidence that
The Defendant waived his right to contest pretrial detention. Based on the information before the Court, including the report ofthe Probation
Office, the Court finds by a preponderance of evidence that no combination of conditions could reasonably assure that the Defendant would appear
for all Court events in this matter.
The Court has reached these conclusions based on the following findings and for the following reasons:
the nature and circumstances ofthe offense: the Defendant, a citizen of the Dominican Republic, is alleged to have illegally re-entered the U.S. after
having previously been deported in l994.
the weight of the evidence: is strong.
the histog and characteristics of the Defendant: the Defendant refused to be interviewed by pretrial services, so the Court has not been provided i
with information that could reasonably assure it that the Defendant should be released. The Defendant gave an incomplete address for a
residence in Wilmington, Delaware and the extent of his ties to the community are unknown. He has used several aliases. I-Ie has allegedly
come into this country at least twice unlawfully.
the nature and seriousness of the danger to the community that would be posed by the Defendant's release: the Defendant has a I994 conviction for
attempted sale of a controlled substance, but there is no other information to suggest he would be a danger.

Case 1 :07-cr-00132-SLR Document 9 Filed 10/12/2007 Page 2 of 2
te AO 472 (Rev. 12/03) Order of Detention Pending Trial
Part IIl—Directi0ns 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 of the corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to the United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance
in connection with _a court proceedin . J? {
ptylsblz (L E§"°`! §®\J\ .
Date Signcrture 0fJudge
Leonard P. Stark U.S. Magistrate
Name and Title ofjndge
*1nsert as applicable: (aj Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 er 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. § 95521).

Case 1:07-cr-00132-SLR

Document 9

Filed 10/12/2007

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-cr-00132-SLR

Document 9

Filed 10/12/2007

Page 2 of 2