[PROPOSED] ORDER DETAINING DEFENDANT ENZO CESTONI PRIOR TO TRIAL

JOSEPH C. SPERO, Chief Magistrate Judge.

On April 19, 2018, the Grand Jury charged Defendant with Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Controlled Substances in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(b)(1)(C); Distribution and Possession with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C); and two counts of Possession with Intent to Distribute Cocaine Base in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C). Defendant made his initial appearance on April 25, 2018, and on May 2, 2018, this Court held a detention hearing. Defendant was present and represented by Assistant Federal Public Defender Ellen Leonida.

Pretrial Services submitted a report that recommended detention on grounds of both Defendant's risk of non-appearance and danger to the community. A Pretrial Services Officer was also present at the hearing. The Government moved for detention, and Defendant opposed. The parties submitted proffers and arguments.

Upon consideration of the Pretrial Services report and the parties' proffers at the detention hearing, the Court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendant poses a risk of flight and by clear and convincing evidence that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the safety of the community. Accordingly, the Court orders Defendant detained pending trial.

The Court bases this order on Defendant's failure to appear after his arrest on his state charge, his arrest while on bond with contraband, his non-compliance while on pre-trial release in his prior federal case, leaving Walden House before completing the program, and his behavior resulting in a forcible extraction from the county jail.

This Order supplements the Court's findings at the detention hearing and serves as written findings of fact and statement of reasons as required by Title 18, United States Code, Section 3142(i).

The Bail Reform Act of 1984 sets forth the factors the Court must consider in determining whether pretrial detention is warranted. In coming to its decision, the Court has considered those factors, paraphrased below:

18 U.S.C. § 3142(g).

Given the nature of the crimes as alleged, as well as the history and characteristics of the defendant, the Court determines that, on the record before it, there is no condition or combination of conditions of release that can reasonably assure the safety of any other person and the community and Defendant's appearance as required. Accordingly, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(i), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

(1) Defendant is committed to the custody of the United States Marshals Service for confinement in a correctional facility;

(2) Defendant be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with his counsel; and

(3) on order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the government, the person in charge of the corrections facility in which Defendant is confined shall deliver Defendant to an authorized Deputy United States Marshal for the purpose of any appearance in connection with a court proceeding.

IT IS SO ORDERED.