DOJ-OGR-00000479.jpg
767 KB
Extraction Summary
8
People
4
Organizations
0
Locations
0
Events
0
Relationships
6
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
767 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a legal filing, specifically page 8 of 33 from case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB, filed on July 18, 2019. It outlines the legal standards for a court to order a defendant's detention based on two separate grounds: dangerousness to the community and risk of flight. The text cites numerous legal precedents from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and the Bail Reform Act to support its arguments regarding evidence standards and the factors a court must consider.
People (8)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Blanco | Defendant in a cited case |
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Blanco, 570 F. App’x 76, 78 (2d Cir. 2014)'.
|
| Ferranti | Defendant in a cited case |
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Ferranti, 66 F.3d 540, 542 (2d Cir. 1995)'.
|
| Chimurenga | Defendant in a cited case |
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Chimurenga, 760 F.2d 400, 403 (2d Cir. 1985)'.
|
| LaFontaine | Party in a cited case |
Mentioned in the case citation 'LaFontaine, 210 F.3d at 134'.
|
| Jackson | Defendant in a cited case |
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Jackson, 823 F.2d 4, 5 (2d Cir. 1987)'.
|
| Millan | Defendant in a cited case |
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Millan, 4 F.3d 1038, 1048 (2d Cir. 1993)'.
|
| Orena | Defendant in a cited case |
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Orena, 986 F.2d 628, 631 (2d Cir. 1993)' which is quoted by the Mill...
|
| Rodriguez | Defendant in a cited case |
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Rodriguez, 950 F.2d 85, 89 (2d Cir. 1991)'.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Court | government agency |
Referenced as the entity that orders a defendant's detention.
|
| United States | government |
Mentioned as the plaintiff in multiple cited court cases (e.g., United States v. Blanco).
|
| 2d Cir. | government agency |
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, cited as the court for multiple legal precedents.
|
| DOJ | government agency |
Appears in the footer as 'DOJ-OGR-00000479', likely indicating the Department of Justice.
|
Key Quotes (6)
"danger to the safety of any other person or the community."Source
— 18 U.S.C. § 3142
(Definition of 'dangerousness' from the U.S. Code.)
DOJ-OGR-00000479.jpg
Quote #1
"Where there is a strong probability that a person will commit additional crimes if released, the need to protect the community becomes sufficiently compelling that detention is, on balance, appropriate."Source
— United States v. Chimurenga
(A quote establishing the standard for detention based on the probability of future crimes.)
DOJ-OGR-00000479.jpg
Quote #2
"[E]ven a single incident of witness tampering . . . [may be] sufficient to revoke bail."Source
— LaFontaine
(A quote indicating that witness tampering can be enough to revoke bail.)
DOJ-OGR-00000479.jpg
Quote #3
"that no conditions could reasonably assure the defendant’s presence at trial."Source
— Legal standard
(The finding a Court must make by a preponderance of the evidence to order detention based on risk of flight.)
DOJ-OGR-00000479.jpg
Quote #4
"[T]he constitutional limits on a detention period based on dangerousness to the community may be looser than the limits on a detention period based solely on risk of flight. In the former case, release risks injury to others, while in the latter case, release risks only the loss of a conviction."Source
— United States v. Millan (quoting United States v. Orena)
(A quote distinguishing the legal standards and consequences for detention based on dangerousness versus risk of flight.)
DOJ-OGR-00000479.jpg
Quote #5
"may reasonably assure the appearance of [the defendant] at trial will not [necessarily] assure the safety of the community."Source
— United States v. Rodriguez
(A quote explaining that a bail package ensuring a defendant's appearance at trial does not automatically ensure community safety.)
DOJ-OGR-00000479.jpg
Quote #6
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,202 characters)
Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 32 Filed 07/18/19 Page 8 of 33
18 U.S.C. § 3142(e). A Court does not need to find both bases are proven to order a defendant’s
detention. See id.; United States v. Blanco, 570 F. App’x 76, 78 (2d Cir. 2014). Dangerousness
means that the defendant is a “danger to the safety of any other person or the community.” 18
U.S.C. § 3142. A finding of dangerousness must be supported by clear and convincing evidence.
See, e.g., United States v. Ferranti, 66 F.3d 540, 542 (2d Cir. 1995). “Where there is a strong
probability that a person will commit additional crimes if released, the need to protect the
community becomes sufficiently compelling that detention is, on balance, appropriate.” United
States v. Chimurenga, 760 F.2d 400, 403 (2d Cir. 1985). “[E]ven a single incident of witness
tampering . . . [may be] sufficient to revoke bail.” LaFontaine, 210 F.3d at 134.
To order detention based upon risk of flight, the Court must find by a preponderance of
the evidence that “that no conditions could reasonably assure the defendant’s presence at trial.”
See, e.g., United States v. Jackson, 823 F.2d 4, 5 (2d Cir. 1987); 18 U.S.C. § 3142. “[T]he
constitutional limits on a detention period based on dangerousness to the community may be
looser than the limits on a detention period based solely on risk of flight. In the former case,
release risks injury to others, while in the latter case, release risks only the loss of a conviction.”
United States v. Millan, 4 F.3d 1038, 1048 (2d Cir. 1993) (quoting United States v. Orena, 986
F.2d 628, 631 (2d Cir. 1993)). A bail package that “may reasonably assure the appearance of [the
defendant] at trial will not [necessarily] assure the safety of the community.” United States v.
Rodriguez, 950 F.2d 85, 89 (2d Cir. 1991).
The Bail Reform Act sets forth the following four factors to be considered in the
release/remand analysis: (1) the nature and circumstances of the crime(s) charged; (2) the weight
of the evidence against the person; (3) the history and characteristics of the defendant, including
the person’s character and financial resources; and (4) the seriousness of the danger posed by the
detention. See id.; United States v. Blanco, 570 F. App’x 76, 78 (2d Cir. 2014). Dangerousness
means that the defendant is a “danger to the safety of any other person or the community.” 18
U.S.C. § 3142. A finding of dangerousness must be supported by clear and convincing evidence.
See, e.g., United States v. Ferranti, 66 F.3d 540, 542 (2d Cir. 1995). “Where there is a strong
probability that a person will commit additional crimes if released, the need to protect the
community becomes sufficiently compelling that detention is, on balance, appropriate.” United
States v. Chimurenga, 760 F.2d 400, 403 (2d Cir. 1985). “[E]ven a single incident of witness
tampering . . . [may be] sufficient to revoke bail.” LaFontaine, 210 F.3d at 134.
To order detention based upon risk of flight, the Court must find by a preponderance of
the evidence that “that no conditions could reasonably assure the defendant’s presence at trial.”
See, e.g., United States v. Jackson, 823 F.2d 4, 5 (2d Cir. 1987); 18 U.S.C. § 3142. “[T]he
constitutional limits on a detention period based on dangerousness to the community may be
looser than the limits on a detention period based solely on risk of flight. In the former case,
release risks injury to others, while in the latter case, release risks only the loss of a conviction.”
United States v. Millan, 4 F.3d 1038, 1048 (2d Cir. 1993) (quoting United States v. Orena, 986
F.2d 628, 631 (2d Cir. 1993)). A bail package that “may reasonably assure the appearance of [the
defendant] at trial will not [necessarily] assure the safety of the community.” United States v.
Rodriguez, 950 F.2d 85, 89 (2d Cir. 1991).
The Bail Reform Act sets forth the following four factors to be considered in the
release/remand analysis: (1) the nature and circumstances of the crime(s) charged; (2) the weight
of the evidence against the person; (3) the history and characteristics of the defendant, including
the person’s character and financial resources; and (4) the seriousness of the danger posed by the
8
DOJ-OGR-00000479
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document