U.S. v. Bilotto

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff, v. VINNIE BILOTTO, Defendant

Court: United States District Court, W.D. Texas, San Antonio Division

Date published: Dec 6, 2005

Civil Action No. SA-04-CR-343 OG (W.D. Tex. Dec. 6, 2005)

Opinion

Civil Action No. SA-04-CR-343 OG.

December 6, 2005

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

NANCY NOWAK, Magistrate Judge

The matter before the Court is defendant's motion to reconsider bond conditions and the government's response thereto.

By his motion the defendant asks the Court to modify the conditions of bond which I imposed by Order dated November 10, 2005; specifically he asks that I reduce the amount of the cash deposit required to secure his bond. He represents that he does not have the required $200,000 deposit and that exceptional circumstances warrant modification and release.

After reviewing the motion and the government's response I decline to reconsider the release conditions. Defendant has been convicted of a felony carrying a maximum 20 year sentence. The guidelines dictate a sentence which includes a period of incarceration. Defendant has been convicted of a crime involving deceit and misrepresentations resulting in large financial gain. He has investment property. He proposes that I reduce the amount of the cash deposit to secure the bond, and accept as a substitute a pledge of what appears to non-homestead property. However, he has not explained why some or all of his investment property could not be liquidated or pledged to secure a loan for the required cash deposit. He has not explained why the $200,000 in stocks and bonds identified in the Pretrial Services Report is not available to be used as security for the bond. He has not addressed the unavailability of funds from the relatives who supported his original request for bond pending sentencing.

Defendant is reminded that any cash posted with the Clerk of Court to secure his bond will be returned if he remains in compliance with all bond conditions. Of course, his cash deposit would be forfeited and he and the surety liable for the remainder of the bond amount if he flees or otherwise fails to comply with those conditions. Mindful that defendant has the burden to show by clear and convincing evidence that release conditions are available to mitigate risks of flight and danger to the community if released, I reaffirm my Order that a substantial cash deposit is warranted here.

For the above reasons, the motion to reconsider is ORDERED DENIED.