U.S. v. Brown, CR618-001. (2018)
Court: District Court, S.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20181015931
Visitors: 14
Filed: Oct. 12, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 12, 2018
Summary: ORDER JAMES E. GRAHAM , Magistrate Judge . Defendant seeks a bond, doc. 26, effectively asking for reconsideration of the Court's determination that detention was appropriate under 18 U.S.C. 3142. Doc. 24 at 2-3. His motion waves at circumstances he contends affect that determination. See doc. 26 at 1-2 (asserting that a bond is now appropriate because, (1) a family friend has volunteered to post a property bond in the amount of $30,000, (2) defendant is not eligible for Armed Career C
Summary: ORDER JAMES E. GRAHAM , Magistrate Judge . Defendant seeks a bond, doc. 26, effectively asking for reconsideration of the Court's determination that detention was appropriate under 18 U.S.C. 3142. Doc. 24 at 2-3. His motion waves at circumstances he contends affect that determination. See doc. 26 at 1-2 (asserting that a bond is now appropriate because, (1) a family friend has volunteered to post a property bond in the amount of $30,000, (2) defendant is not eligible for Armed Career Cr..
More
ORDER
JAMES E. GRAHAM, Magistrate Judge.
Defendant seeks a bond, doc. 26, effectively asking for reconsideration of the Court's determination that detention was appropriate under 18 U.S.C. § 3142. Doc. 24 at 2-3. His motion waves at circumstances he contends affect that determination. See doc. 26 at 1-2 (asserting that a bond is now appropriate because, (1) a family friend has volunteered to post a property bond in the amount of $30,000, (2) defendant is not eligible for Armed Career Criminal status, (3) he has been detained since his arrest "without incident," (4) his medical issues are not being adequately addressed, and (5) he volunteers to cooperate with law enforcement). None of those reasons, however, address the Court's stated bases for detention. See doc. 24 at 2-3 (listing, among other reasons for detention, the strength of the evidence against Defendant, including the Government's proffer of "video evidence . . . depicting defendant engaged in drug sales," as well as his "prior criminal history, [p]articipation in criminal activity while on probation, parole, or supervision, [and his h]istory of alcohol and substance abuse). Since he offers nothing that undermines the determination that no condition or combination of conditions of release will reasonably assure either the community's safety or defendant's appearance, his motion is DENIED. Doc. 26.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
