From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Lockett

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
Nov 26, 2012
Case No. 1:12-cr-00136-RHB (W.D. Mich. Nov. 26, 2012)

Opinion

Case No. 1:12-cr-00136-RHB

11-26-2012

United States of America v. Shaun Otha Lockett Defendant


ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL

After conducting a detention hearing under the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), I conclude that these facts require that the defendant be detained pending trial.

Part I - Findings of Fact

____ (1) The defendant is charged with an offense described in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(1) and has previously been convicted of ____ a federal offense ____ a state or local offense that would have been a federal offense iffederal jurisdiction had existed - that is

____ a crime of violence as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 3156(a)(4), or an offense listed in 18 U.S.C. § 2332b(g)(5)(B) for which the prison term is 10 years or more.
____ an offense for which the maximum sentence is death or life imprisonment.
____ an offense for which a maximum prison term of ten years or more is prescribed in:
____________________________.
____ a felony committed after the defendant had been convicted of two or more prior federal offenses described in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(1)(A)-(C), or comparable state or local offenses.
____ any felony that is not a crime ofviolence but involves:
____ a minor victim
____ the possession or use of a firearm or destructive device or any other dangerous weapon
____ a failure to register under18 U.S.C. § 2250
____ (2) The offense described in finding (1) was committed while the defendant was on release pending trial for a federal, state or local offense. ____ (3) A period of less than 5 years has elapsed since the ____ date of conviction ____ defendant's release from prison for the offense described in finding (1). ____ (4) Findings (1), (2) and (3) establish a rebuttable presumption that no condition will reasonably assure the safety of another person or the community. I further find that defendant has not rebutted that presumption.

Insert as applicable: (a) Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.); (b) Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. § 951 et seq.); or (c) Section1 of Act of Sept. 15,1980 (21 U.S.C. § 955a).

Alternative Findings (A)

(1) There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an offense

forwhich a maximum prison term often years or more is prescribed in:

Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.).*

____ under18 U.S.C. § 924(c). (2) The defendant has not rebutted the presumption established by finding (1) that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the defendant's appearance and the safety of the community.

Alternative Findings (B)

____ (1) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear. ____ (2) There is a serious risk that the defendant will endanger the safety of another person or the community.

Part II - Statement of the Reasons for Detention

I find that the testimony and information submitted at the detention hearing establishes by clear and convincing evidence ____ a preponderance of the evidence that:

1. Defendant has a minimal employment history.

2. Defendant has twice been charged with witness intimidation.

3. Defendant has twice been charged with probation violations, one involving possession of a handgun.

4. Defendant has twice previously been convicted of a drug offense.

5. Defendant failed to appear for an arraignment on one occasion.

Part III - Directions Regarding Detention

The defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney General or a designated representative for confinement in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or held in custody pending appeal. The defendant must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to consult privately with defense counsel. On order of United States Court or on request of an attorney for the Government, the person in charge of the corrections facility must deliver the defendant to the United States marshal for a court appearance.

Judge's Signature: Ellen S. Carmody

Name and Title: Ellen S. Carmody, U.S. Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Lockett

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
Nov 26, 2012
Case No. 1:12-cr-00136-RHB (W.D. Mich. Nov. 26, 2012)
Case details for

United States v. Lockett

Case Details

Full title:United States of America v. Shaun Otha Lockett Defendant

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Date published: Nov 26, 2012

Citations

Case No. 1:12-cr-00136-RHB (W.D. Mich. Nov. 26, 2012)