Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/ilnd;;1:16-cr-00515_de86> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 5 of
5
with 100 items per page.
- ilnd;;1:16-cr-00515_de86 RegisterActionDate "2020-05-12" @default.
- ilnd;;1:16-cr-00515_de86 RegisterActionDescriptionText "MINUTE entry before the Honorable Robert M. Dow, Jr.M as to C7D8061 (1): This matter is before Judge Dow as emergency judge. For the reasons stated below and those stated on the record in open court at today's bond hearing, Defendant's emergency motion for pre-trial release 82 is granted, subject to the release protocols put in place by the medical personnel at the facility where Defendant is now in custody. Counsel and the Pre-Trial Services Officer are directed to consult with the staff at the MCC, confer on a release date and plan consistent with the MCC's protocols, and prepare the bond paperwork for signatures. When the paperwork is ready for execution by Judge Dow, they should transmit the documents in a PDF document to Mr. Bruton and Courtroom Deputy Carolyn Hoesly by email. In addition to the conditions proposed in the 5/11/2020 Pre-Trial Services Addendum, the Court imposes home detention with monitoring to be determined by Pre-Trial Services in the 48 hours following Defendant's release or any extension of that time requested by Pre-Trial Services. By way of background, shortly after his arrest on drug charges in 2016, Magistrate Judge Mason held a detention hearing and ordered Defendant to be detained. In April 2017, Defendant entered a guilty plea. He is scheduled to be sentenced on July 24. Given the posture of the case, the parties appear to be in agreement that release would be appropriate here only if Defendant can satisfy the high standards set out in 18 U.S.C. 3145(c), which require both (1) a showing by clear and convincing evidence that he is not a flight risk or a danger to the community and (2) "exceptional reasons" why his detention would not be appropriate. As the Court observed at today's hearing, it takes seriously the statutory commands and has only rarely found the "exceptional reasons" standard satisfied when presented with motions for release after a finding of guilt, either by plea or after trial. In this instance, however, the Court finds that standard met. As of today, Defendant has been in custody approximately 45 months. It is anticipated that the Government will recommend a below-Guidelines sentence of 67 months imprisonment. Given the terms of his plea agreement, Defendant has an enormous incentive to comply with all conditions of his release between now and his sentencing, as any slip ups on his part may jeopardize the agreement and could subject him to a substantially longer sentence. The Government made a compelling argument that the COVID-19 pandemic does not create any special circumstances as to this Defendant, because he has no health issues that would make him especially susceptible to complications if he were to contract the virus. However, it is likely that few if any of the more than 500 detainees at MCC are similarly situated to Defendant in these other respects: (1) he has already served approximately 70 percent of the sentence that the Government will recommend at sentencing; (2) he has an enormous incentive to strictly abide by any conditions of release because of the terms of his plea agreement, thereby ensuring his appearance at future court dates and the safety of the community; (3) his agreement is contingent on testimony at a trial that is set for July but may be in jeopardy of being postponed because of the pandemic; (4) his sentencing will take place sometime after the trial is held; and (5) Pre-Trial Services believes that conditions can be fashioned under which he can safety be released. In regard, to points (3) and (4), everyone in the criminal justice system certainly hopes that jury trials will proceed soon, but social distancing rules may place limits on how quickly this district will be able to try cases both those postponed already since mid-March and those scheduled to be tried later this year or next year. As noted during the hearing, this constellation of circumstances may be unique to this Defendant, and surely is not shared by more than a handful of detainees, and thus qualifies as materially exceptional. Mailed notice (cdh, ) (Entered: 05/12/2020)" @default.
- ilnd;;1:16-cr-00515_de86 AdministrativeID "89" @default.
- ilnd;;1:16-cr-00515_de86 OntologyLabel minute_entry @default.
- ilnd;;1:16-cr-00515_de86 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilnd;;1:16-cr-00515_de79 @default.