1:21-cr-00061•USA v. REARDON
Texte intégral
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) v. ) 1:21-cr-00061-LEW ) NATHAN REARDON, ) ) Defendant ) ORDER ON OBJECTION TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S ORDER ON GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO REVOKE BAIL AND FOR DETENTION On April 21, 2022, the Magistrate Judge granted the Government’s motion to revoke bail and committed Defendant Nathan Reardon to the custody of the Attorney General or his designated representative for confinement in a corrections facility pending the trial in this matter. Order on Mot. to Revoke Bail and for Detention (ECF No. 85). The findings central to the Magistrate Judge’s Order, entered pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3148(b), are: (1) that clear and convincing evidence exists that Defendant violated the conditions of his pretrial release by applying for Emergency Rental Assistance without prior approval of the supervising officer; and (2) that Defendant is unlikely to abide by any condition or combination of conditions of release. These findings were sufficient to justify revocation of release. See United States v. Quirion, 808 F. Supp. 2d 343, 346 (D. Me. 2011); United States v. Minor, 204 Fed. App’x 453, 454 (5th Cir. 2006) (per curiam unpublished op.) (“The statute clearly provides that these findings alone are sufficient to justify revocation and detention; a court need not also find that the defendant will flee or pose a danger to the community.”). Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEW Document 97 Filed 06/06/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>
2 Defendant objects to the revocation of bail. He argues that he is not a danger to the community and that he would abide by a condition of release “prohibiting any application for state or federal relief while on release.” Objection to Mag. J. Decision (ECF No. 87). The Government timely responded. Gov’t Opp’n (ECF No. 88). Defendant did not file a reply. I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge’s Order, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge, as necessary in a proceeding under 18 U.S.C. § 3145(b); and I concur with his findings for the reasons set forth in his Order and determine that no further proceeding is necessary. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. S O ORDERED . Dated this 6th day of June, 2022. /s/ Lance E. Walker UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEW Document 97 Filed 06/06/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>
Vous vous demandez comment ce texte s’applique à votre situation ?
Consultation gratuite, sans engagement
Décrivez votre situation. Notre équipe vous recontactera par e-mail pour votre consultation.
Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude
Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.