Opinion
Case No. 3:07cr114/LAC.
October 3, 2007
ORDER
This Cause is before the Court on Defendant's Motion to Revoke or Amend the Detention Order entered by the Magistrate Judge on August 27, 2007.
A magistrate's pretrial detention order must be reviewed de novo by the district court. See United States v. Hurtado, 779 F.2d 1467, 1481 (11th Cir. 1985). The court must "exercise independent consideration of all facts properly before it," United States v. Gaviria, 828 F.2d 667, 670 (11th Cir. 1987) (citing Hurtado, 779 F.2d at 1480-81), but this does not require that the district court conduct a de novo hearing. See United States v. King, 849 F.2d 485, 490 (11th Cir. 1988). If, after careful review of the pleadings and the evidence presented at the magistrate's detention hearing, the district court concludes that the magistrate's findings of fact are supported and conclusions of law are correct, the court need only state that it adopts the magistrate's pretrial detention order. Id. at 490.
In his motion, Defendant challenges the Magistrate's conclusions of fact and law based on the evidence presented, but after a thorough review of the pleadings, the transcript, and the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g), the Court is in full agreement with the Magistrate's finding that the Defendant poses a significant risk of flight and a potential threat to the alien witnesses in this case, and that there is no condition or combination of conditions of release that would reasonably assure Defendant's appearance at trial were he to be released. The Court therefore adopts the Magistrate's pretrial order of detention.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
Defendant's Motion for Revocation of the Detention Order (doc. 29) is DENIED. Defendant shall remain on pretrial detention in accordance with the Magistrate's Order of August 27, 2007, until further Order of the Court.
ORDERED.