From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Trejo

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California, Southern Division
Sep 2, 2015
SA 15-0452M (C.D. Cal. Sep. 2, 2015)

Opinion


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ERIC EFREN TREJO, Defendant. No. SA 15-0452M United States District Court, C.D. California, Southern Division. September 2, 2015

          ORDER OF DETENTION

          DOUGLAS F. McCORMICK, Magistrate Judge.

         I.

         A. (x) On motion of the Government in a case allegedly involving:

1. (x) a crime of violence.

2. () an offense with maximum sentence of life imprisonment or death.

3. () a narcotics or controlled substance offense with maximum sentence of ten years or more.

4. () any felony - where defendant convicted of two or more prior offenses described above.

5. () any felony that is not otherwise a crime of violence that involves a minor victim, or possession or use of a firearm or destructive device or any other dangerous weapon, or a failure to register under 18 U.S.C. § 2250.

         B. (x) On motion by the Government/() on Court's own motion, in a case allegedly involving:

         (x) On the further allegation by the Government of:

1. (x) a serious risk that the defendant will flee.

2. () a serious risk that the defendant will:

a. () obstruct or attempt to obstruct justice.

b. () threaten, injure or intimidate a prospective witness or juror, or attempt to do so.

         C. The Government () is/(X) is not entitled to a rebuttable presumption that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the defendant's appearance as required and the safety or any person or the community.

         II.

         A. (x) The Court finds that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure:

1. () the appearance of the defendant as required.

() and/or

2. (x) the safety of any person or the community.

         B. () The Court finds that the defendant has not rebutted by sufficient evidence to the contrary the presumption provided by statute.

         III.

         The Court has considered:

         A. (x) the nature and circumstances of the offense(s) charged, including whether the offense is a crime of violence, a Federal crime of terrorism, or involves a minor victim or a controlled substance, firearm, explosive, or destructive device;

         B. (x) the weight of the evidence against the defendant;

         C. (x) the history and characteristics of the defendant; and

         D. (x) the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or the community.

         IV.

         The Court also has considered all the evidence presented at the hearing and the arguments and/or statements of counsel, and the Pretrial Services Report/recommendation

         V.

         The Court bases the foregoing finding(s) on the following:

         A. () As to flight risk: _______________________________________________________________

         B. (x) As to danger:

The Court find that the government has met its burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that there are no conditions or combination of conditions that will reasonably assure the safety of any other person and the community. The Court bases its finding on the facts proffered by the government in the instant complaint (SA 15-452M) as well as the related search warrant affidavit (SA 15-458M). The latter document implicates Defendant as a member of a bank robbery "crew" that has conducted as many as 10 bank robberies in southern California since April of this year. These robberies included "takeover" robberies and the use of a firearm in connection with one robbery, allegations which cause the Court particular concern. The Court considered whether a condition of location monitoring together with home confinement or other restrictions would reasonably assure the safety of the community; however, the Court's ultimate conclusion is that any assurance offered by such a condition would be inadequate in light of the crimes of violence and use of a firearm described in the affidavits.

         VI.

         A. () The Court finds that a serious risk exists the defendant will:

1. () obstruct or attempt to obstruct justice.

2. () attempt to/() threaten, injure or intimidate a witness or juror.

         B. The Court bases the foregoing finding(s) on the following: ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________

         VII.

         A. IT IS THEREFORE 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 defendant is confined 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. Trejo

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California, Southern Division
Sep 2, 2015
SA 15-0452M (C.D. Cal. Sep. 2, 2015)
Case details for

United States v. Trejo

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ERIC EFREN TREJO, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California, Southern Division

Date published: Sep 2, 2015

Citations

SA 15-0452M (C.D. Cal. Sep. 2, 2015)