Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States of America v. Daniel Santiago

December 6, 2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
DANIEL SANTIAGO ,
DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Nathanael Cousins United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING

TRIAL

In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), a detention hearing was held on December 5, 2012. Defendant was present, represented by his attorney Peter Goodman. The United States was represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney Randall Luskey.

PART I.PRESUMPTIONS APPLICABLE

/ / The defendant is charged with an offense described in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(1) and the defendant has been convicted of a prior offense described in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(1) while on release pending trial for a federal, state or local offense, and a period of not more than five (5) years has elapsed since the date of conviction or the release of the person from imprisonment, whichever is later.

This establishes a rebuttable presumption that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the safety of any other person and the community.

/ / There is probable cause based upon the indictment to believe that the defendant has committed an offense

A. for which a maximum term of imprisonment of 10 years or more is prescribed in 21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq., § 951 et seq., or § 955a et seq., OR

B. under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c): use of a firearm during the commission of a felony.

This establishes a rebuttable presumption that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant as required and the safety of the community.

/ X / No presumption applies.

PART II.REBUTTAL OF PRESUMPTIONS,IF APPLICABLE

/ / The defendant has not come forward with sufficient evidence to rebut the applicable presumption, and he therefore will be ordered detained.

/ / The defendant has come forward with evidence to rebut the applicable presumption[s] to wit: . Thus, the burden of proof ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.