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 v. Mendoza

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

December 20, 2013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
LUCIO LERENZO MENDOZA, Defendant.

ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL

NATHANAEL COUSINS, Magistrate Judge.

In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), the court held a detention hearing on December 18, 2013. Defendant Lucio Lerenzo Mendoza was present, represented by his attorney Deborah Levine. The United States was represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney Marc Wolf. The hearing was held publicly. Both parties were advised of their opportunity to call witnesses, present evidence, for the defendant to testify, to cross-examine witnesses, and of the opportunity to present information by proffer. Both parties were advised of their right to appeal this detention order to the District Court.

Both parties presented information by way of attorney proffer. At the hearing, the government referred to information that is set forth in police reports and audio and video recordings. In accordance with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16 and in order to protect the due process rights of the defendant, the Court ordered the government to produce to Mendoza's counsel by December 24, 2013, a copy of each recording and report referenced at the hearing.

Defendant may seek to reverse or modify this order after review of the materials to be produced by the government. The parties must meet and confer about the timing of any motion for pretrial release.

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.

/ X / 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. X 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.

/ / No presumption applies.

PART II. REBUTTAL OF PRESUMPTIONS, IF APPLICABLE

/ X / The defendant has not come forward with sufficient evidence to rebut the applicable presumption, and he ...


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.