Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Platt

United States District Court, D. Colorado

October 1, 2018

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
1. JOSEPH MEYER PLATT, Defendant.

          ORDER AFFIRMING DETENTION ORDER

          WILLIAM J. MARTINEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         The Government charges Defendant Joseph Meyer Platt (“Platt”) with possession with intent to distribute ecstasy (Count 1), possession with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine (Count 2), and possession of a firearm in connection with a drug trafficking offense (Count 3). (ECF No. 1.) Currently before the Court is Platt's Motion to Review Detention Order (“Motion for Review”) (ECF No. 22), challenging U.S. Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe's May 23, 2018 decision to detain Platt prior to trial (ECF No. 10). The Court held an evidentiary hearing and oral argument on September 19, 2018, and then took the motion under advisement. For the reasons explained below, Judge Watanabe's detention order will be affirmed.

         I. DETENTION PRESUMPTIONS & STANDARD OF REVIEW

         A. Initial Standard

         The Court “shall order the detention of the [defendant] before trial” if the Court finds, after a hearing, “that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required and the safety of any other person and the community.” 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(1). “Subject to rebuttal by the [defendant], it shall be presumed that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the [defendant] as required and the safety of the community if the judicial officer finds that there is probable cause to believe that the person committed * * * an offense for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed in the Controlled Substances Act.” Id. § 3142(e)(3)(A).[1]

         The Rules of Evidence do not apply in a detention hearing. Id. § 3142(f)(2). “The facts the judicial officer uses to support a finding pursuant to subsection (e) that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the safety of any other person and the community shall be supported by clear and convincing evidence.” Id.[2] The factors the Court “shall” consider are:

(1) the nature and circumstances of the offense charged, including whether the offense . . . involves . . . a controlled substance, firearm, explosive, or destructive device;
(2) the weight of the evidence against the person;
(3) the history and characteristics of the person, including-
(A) the person's character, physical and mental condition, family ties, employment, financial resources, length of residence in the community, community ties, past conduct, history relating to drug or alcohol abuse, criminal history, and record concerning appearance at court proceedings; and
(B) whether, at the time of the current offense or arrest, the person was on probation, on parole, or on other release pending trial, sentencing, appeal, or completion of sentence for an offense under Federal, State, or local law; and
(4) the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or the community that would be posed by the person's release.

Id. § 3142(g).

         B. Review & Reopening

          “If a person is ordered detained by a magistrate judge, . . . the person may file, with the [district court], a motion for revocation or amendment of the order.” 18 U.S.C. § 3145(b). The district judge then reviews the magistrate judge's decision de ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.