From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Stincer

United States District Court, Central District of California
Oct 12, 2022
No. 22-MJ-3935-DUTY (C.D. Cal. Oct. 12, 2022)

Opinion

22-MJ-3935-DUTY

10-12-2022

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. PETER ALEXANDER STINCER, Defendant


ORDER OF DETENTION AFTER HEARING (18 U.S.C. § 3148 (B): ALLEGATIONS OF VIOLATION OF PRETRIAL CONDITIONS OF RELEASE)

KAREN L. STEVENSON, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

I.

On motion of the Government involving an alleged violation of conditions of pretrial release, and a warrant for arrest, II.

The Court finds there is:

1.

A. () Probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed a Federal, State, or local crime while on release and/or

B. (X) Clear and convincing evidence that the defendant has violated any other condition of release; and

2.

A. () Based on the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g), there is no condition or combination of conditions of release that will assure that the defendant will not flee or pose a danger to the safety or any other person or the community; or

B. (X) The defendant is unlikely to abide by any condition or combination of conditions of release.

3. () There is probable cause to believe that, while on release, the defendant committed a Federal, State, or local felony, and the presumption that no condition or combination of conditions will assure that the person will not pose a danger to the safety of any other person or the community has not been rebutted.

OR

4. () The Court finds that there are conditions of release that will assure that the defendant will not flee or pose a danger to the safety of any other person or the community, and that the defendant will abide by such conditions. See separate Order setting conditions.

() It is further ordered that this order is stayed for 72 hours in order to allow the Government to seek review from the assigned district judge or criminal duty district judge as appropriate.

OR

III.

A. IT IS ORDERED that the defendant be detained prior to trial.

B. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant be committed to the custody of the Attorney General for confinement in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal.

C. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with counsel.

D. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, on order of a Court of the United States or on request of any attorney for the Government, the person in charge of the corrections facility in which the defendant is confined shall deliver the defendant to a United States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding.


Summaries of

United States v. Stincer

United States District Court, Central District of California
Oct 12, 2022
No. 22-MJ-3935-DUTY (C.D. Cal. Oct. 12, 2022)
Case details for

United States v. Stincer

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. PETER ALEXANDER STINCER, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Oct 12, 2022

Citations

No. 22-MJ-3935-DUTY (C.D. Cal. Oct. 12, 2022)