Opinion
21-CR-204
06-27-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. MARIO M. JOHNSON, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
WILLIAM E. DUFFIN, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Mario M. Johnson is charged with various drug offenses. (ECF No. 87.) The court on October 25, 2021, ordered Johnson detained pending trial. (ECF No. 67.) The court found that the government had proven by clear and convincing evidence “that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure ... the safety of any other person and the community” if Johnson were released. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(1); (ECF No. 67). The government proffered that Johnson was a member of the Ganster Disciples and the charges against him were supported through controlled buys. (ECF No. 66 at 12.) He has a record of non-compliance on supervision and is facing a mandatory minimum of ten years in prison. (ECF No. 66 at 1-2.) The government proffered that Johnson had also threatened a witness, and then later armed himself and attempted unsuccessfully to locate the witness. Although the information relied on multiple layers of hearsay, it was especially concerning to the court and, based on the totality of the circumstances, detention was necessary.
On June 23, 2023, Johnson filed a motion for release. (ECF No. 299.)
A detention hearing may be reopened at any time based on a showing “that information exists that was not known to the movant at the time of the hearing and that has a material bearing on the issue whether there are conditions of release that will reasonably assure the appearance of such person as required and the safety of any other person and the community.” 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f).
Johnson has failed to offer any material new information. He simply asks that he be released subject to the conditions of location monitoring, weekly meetings with Pretrial Services, and that he reside at a particular home. (ECF No. 299.) Having failed to present any new and material information, Johnson has failed to demonstrate that reopening the detention hearing is warranted. Accordingly, IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Mario M. Johnson's “Motion for Bond” (ECF No. 299) is denied.