From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Marquez

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California
Feb 3, 2015
15-41M (C.D. Cal. Feb. 3, 2015)

Opinion


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ROBERTO BERUMEN MARQUEZ, Defendant. No. 15-41M United States District Court, C.D. California. February 3, 2015

          ORDER OF DETENTION

          ALKA SAGAR, Magistrate Judge.

         I.

         The Court conducted a detention hearing:

         [] On motion of the Government [18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(1)] in a case allegedly involving Choose an item.

         [X] On motion by the Government or on the Court's own motion [18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(2)] in a case allegedly involving a serious risk that the defendant will flee.

         The Court concludes that the Government 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 [18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(2)].

         II.

         The Court finds that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure: [X] the appearance of the defendant as required.

[X] the safety of any person or the community.

         III.

         The Court has considered: (a) 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) the weight of evidence against the defendant; (c) the history and characteristics of the defendant; and (d) the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or the community. [18 U.S.C. § 3142(g)] The Court also considered all the evidence adduced at the hearing and the arguments, the arguments of counsel, and the report and recommendation of the U.S. Pretrial Services Agency.

         IV.

         The Court bases its conclusions on the following:

As to risk of non-appearance:

[] Lack of significant bail resources

[] Refusal to interview with Pretrial Services

[] No stable residence or employment

[X] Previous failure to appear or violations of probation, parole, or release

[X] Ties to foreign countries

[] Unrebutted presumption [18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(2)]

[X] IMMIGRATION DETAINER/undocumented immigration status, and a Pending Supervised Release violation petition.

         As to danger to the community:

         [X] Nature of previous criminal convictions, which include crimes of violence and defendant's prior conviction for similar criminal conduct

[X] Allegations in present charging document

[] Substance abuse

[] Already in custody on state or federal offense

[X] currently facing a supervised release violation petition

         V.

         [] The Court finds a serious risk that the defendant will

[] obstruct or attempt to obstruct justice.

[] threaten, injure or intimidate a prospective witness or juror, or attempt to do so.

         The Court bases its conclusions on the following:

         Defendant is an undocumented alien. Defendant was previously deported/removed to Mexico by immigration authorities in 1999, 2000, 2003 and 2011 following his conviction, in 1997, for second degree robbery, an aggravated felony. The Court is not convinced that the defendant will abide by its order to appear for future court appearances if released on bail given his history and the fact that in addition to the prospective penalty that defendant faces, if convicted of the charged offense, he will likely be deported after serving the sentence imposed, and the Court finds that, in conjunction with the other factors noted above, this will provide an incentive to flee the jurisdiction.

         VI.

         IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the defendant be detained until trial. The defendant will 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. The defendant will be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with counsel. 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 will deliver the defendant to a United States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding. [18 U.S.C. § 3142(i)]


Summaries of

United States v. Marquez

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California
Feb 3, 2015
15-41M (C.D. Cal. Feb. 3, 2015)
Case details for

United States v. Marquez

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ROBERTO BERUMEN MARQUEZ, Defendant.

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

Date published: Feb 3, 2015

Citations

15-41M (C.D. Cal. Feb. 3, 2015)