USA v. Thornton et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
United States of America, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	) 	ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO MODIFY
) 	CONDITIONS OF NO CONTACT ORDER
vs. 	)
)
Dejuan Ranier Thornton, 	) 	Case No. 1:21-cr-240
)
Defendant. 	)
Following his initial appearance and arraignment on December 9, 2021, the court remanded
Defendant Dejuan Ranier Thornton (“Thornton”) into custody pending a detention hearing. (Doc.
No. 15). 	On December 13, 2021, he filed a waiver of his right to a detention hearing and was
ordered detained pending trial. (Doc. Nos. 23, 26). He has recently executed a plea agreement and
has given his consent to the institution of a pre-sentence investigation by the United States Probation
Office. (Doc. Nos. 57, 59). His plea and sentencing is set for May 15, 2023. (Doc. No. 60).
Thornton’s co-defendant, Madison Lynn Endresen (“Endresen”), was initially detained
following her initial appearance and arraignment on December 9, 2021. (Doc. No. 20). However,
on December 13, 2021, the court issued an order releasing her subject to a number of conditions, one
of which was the requirement that she have no direct or indirect contact with Thornton. (Doc. No.
25). Like Thornton, she has recently executed a plea agreement and has given her consent to the
institution of a pre-sentence investigation by the United States Probation Office. (Doc. Nos. 53, 55).
Her plea and sentencing is set for April 14, 2023. (Doc. No. 56).
On February 6, 2023, Thornton filed a “Motion to Modify Conditions of No Contact Order.”
(Doc. No. 61). He requests that the court strike the condition of Endresen’s release that prohibits
1
Case 1:21-cr-00240-DMT Document 62 Filed 02/07/23 Page 1 of 2

her from contacting him as the two share a child and would like to discuss parental issues. He points
out that he and Endresen have executed plea agreements and that he expects to remain incarcerated.
He further advises that neither the United States nor Endresen object to his motion.
The court typically would not entertain a motion filed by one defendant to modify a co-
defendant’s conditions of release. However, the court will make an exception in this case given the
current posture of this case, the fact that Thornton and Endresen share a child, and the fact that
neither the United State nor Endresen object to the modification requested. Thornton and Endresen
share a child and so have reason to communicate. 	As Thornton has pointed out, both he and
Endresen have executed plea agreements, which arguably ameliorates some of the concern that
necessitated the imposition of the no contact order, and he is likely to remain in custody, which
means that his telephone calls will be likely be monitored. Given these circumstances, the court
GRANTS Thornton’s motion (Doc. No. 61) and strikes the provision of Endresen’s release
conditions that prohibits her from contacting Thornton.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 7th day of February, 2023.
/s/ Clare R. Hochhalter
Clare R. Hochhalter, Magistrate Judge
United States District Court
2
Case 1:21-cr-00240-DMT Document 62 Filed 02/07/23 Page 2 of 2