Filed: Nov. 02, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 02, 2018
Summary: ORDER CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER , Chief District Judge . AND NOW, this 2nd day of November, 2018, upon consideration of the motion (Doc. 110) by defendant Louis F. Petrossi ("Petrossi") requesting release pending appeal pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3143(b), 1 and it appearing that, under Section 3143(b), a convicted defendant must demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he is not likely to flee or to pose a danger to the community if released, see 18 U.S.C. 3143(b)(1)(A), and further
Summary: ORDER CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER , Chief District Judge . AND NOW, this 2nd day of November, 2018, upon consideration of the motion (Doc. 110) by defendant Louis F. Petrossi ("Petrossi") requesting release pending appeal pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3143(b), 1 and it appearing that, under Section 3143(b), a convicted defendant must demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he is not likely to flee or to pose a danger to the community if released, see 18 U.S.C. 3143(b)(1)(A), and further ..
More
ORDER
CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER, Chief District Judge.
AND NOW, this 2nd day of November, 2018, upon consideration of the motion (Doc. 110) by defendant Louis F. Petrossi ("Petrossi") requesting release pending appeal pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(b),1 and it appearing that, under Section 3143(b), a convicted defendant must demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he is not likely to flee or to pose a danger to the community if released, see 18 U.S.C. § 3143(b)(1)(A), and further must demonstrate that his appeal is not for purpose of delay and "raises a substantial question of law or fact likely to result in" a new trial or reduced sentence, id. § 3143(b)(1)(B)(ii), and it also appearing that the substantial question requirement tasks the defendant to show that there exists in his case a "significant question at issue which is either novel, which has not been decided by controlling precedent, or which is fairly doubtful," United States v. Miller, 753 F.2d 19, 23 (3d Cir. 1985), and to further show that said question "is sufficiently important to the merits that a contrary appellate ruling is likely to require reversal or a new trial," id., and the court observing that Petrossi raises several issues on appeal of his convictions in United States v. Petrossi, No. 1:16-CR-234, Doc. 407 (E.D.N.Y. May 29, 2018) ("Petrossi I"), which he contends are substantial questions of law likely to result in vacatur of his conviction and a new trial, and that Petrossi contends his convictions in Petrossi I are related and intertwined with the offenses of conviction in the instant case, and the court noting that, in Petrossi I, Judge Brian M. Hogan issued a memorandum opinion denying Petrossi's motion for release pending appeal because "the Court [did] not believe that [Petrossi's] appeal [would] result in reversal or an order for a new trial," United States v. Petrossi, No. 1:16-CR-234, 2018 WL 5634928, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 31, 2018),2 and, moreover, the court independently concluding that Petrossi has not demonstrated a basis for release pending appeal under 18 U.S.C. § 3143(b) in the instant matter because Petrossi has not presented any significant questions which are novel, undecided by precedent, or fairly doubtful,3 it is hereby ORDERED that Petrossi's motion (Doc. 110) for release pending appeal is DENIED.
