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. Miller

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts

March 3, 2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
DUSTEN JAMES MILLER, Defendant

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION TO REOPEN PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 3142(F)

          !David H. Hennessy United States Magistrate Judge.

         This matter came before the court on Defendant's February 3, 2017 Motion to Reopen the Detention Hearing, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f).[1] Defendant alleges that there exists information that was not known to him at the time of the detention hearing that bears materially on the issue of release. On February 21, 2017, Defendant filed a document styled “Notice of Release Proposal, ” in which Defendant proposed conditions for release, including residence in a sober house in Dorchester, Massachusetts. The United States filed a written opposition. This court held a hearing on February 23, 2017. The court finds that while there is new information that bears on the issue of release, it is not material and, even if it were, there are no condition or combination of conditions that will reasonably assure Defendant's appearance as required. Accordingly, the motion is denied.

         Background

         Defendants is charged in a superseding indictment with Conspiracy to Commit Bank Fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349, Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1956(h), and Conspiracy to Commit Identity Theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028(f). His co-defendants are his girlfriend and his brother. According to the government, Defendant participated in a number of fraudulent loans involving airplanes and cars and, ultimately, losses of approximately $2 million.

         Defendant was arrested on May 11, 2016 in Chicago on the basis of a criminal complaint, and had his initial appearance that day in the Northern District of Illinois. Defendant was appointed counsel and interviewed by Pretrial Services. On May 13, 2016, Magistrate Judge Jeffrey Gilbert held a detention hearing in Chicago, at the conclusion of which Judge Gilbert ordered Defendant detained. A transcript of the Chicago detention hearing is annexed to Defendant's motion, Doc 113, as Exhibit A.

         Defendant was produced in this District on June 17, 2016. See Doc. 32. By that time, the grand jury had returned an indictment and superseding indictment. See Doc. 15 and 27. This court arraigned Defendant, noting that a detention hearing had been held in connection with Defendant's arrest. See Doc. 32.

         Discussion

         18 U.S.C. § 3142(f) provides in relevant part that a detention hearing:

may be reopened, before or after a determination by the judicial officer, at any time before trial if the judicial officer finds that information exists that was not known to the movant at the time of the hearing and that has a material bearing on the issue whether there are conditions of release that will reasonably assure the appearance of such person as required and the safety of any other person and the community.[2]

         In the context of a motion to reopen a detention hearing, whether new information establishes that conditions exist which will reasonably assure a person's appearance as required depends upon consideration of the Congressionally-mandated factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g). See United States v. Simpson, No.: 08-CR-733 TS, 2010 WL 129793 at * 1 (D. Utah, Jan. 8, 2010). Those factor are: the nature and circumstances of the charged offense, the weight of the evidence, the history and characteristics of the person, and the nature and seriousness of the danger to other persons posed by the person upon release. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g).

         In support of the motion to reopen the detention hearing, Defendant proposes release on the following conditions, which he claims comprise new information that materially bears on the question of release:

-Residency at the American House, a sober house located at 15 Seaver Street in Dorchester, where, he represents, a bed has been reserved for him;
-Payment of the cost of $175 per week for such residency by ...

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.