Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cr-00271/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cr-00271-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Shannon Kindelay
Defendant
United States of America
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Shannon Kindelay, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CR 05-271-PHX-NVW

ORDER

Defendant has filed a Motion to Reopen Detention Hearing (Doc. #21) in which she

alleges that changed circumstances warrant a reconsideration of her detention. The

government has filed a Response (Doc. #23) to Defendant's motion and Defendant has filed

a Reply (Doc. #24).

Following a detention hearing on April 15, 2005, the court ordered Defendant to be

detained after concluding that she was a danger to the community. Defendant now requests

that the court modify its detention order and release her to her mother's custody pending the

completion of her case. Defendant states that she is pregnant with twins with a due date in

January 2006. She further states that she has diabetes and requires testing at least five times

per day. Defendant contends that as a result of her condition, she has been in isolation since

early October, typically confined to her cell for 24 hours per day. She further contends that

her blood sugar level is sometimes not tested as often as it should be. 

Case 2:05-cr-00271-NVW Document 25 Filed 11/21/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

 Defendant is entitled to adequate health care while she is incarcerated and the court

does not read Defendant's motion to assert that such a right is being denied. Moreover, such

a claim would have to be raised in a civil rights action, not in a motion to reconsider

detention.

- 2 -

The government argues in its response that the change in Defendant's conditions of

confinement resulting from her pregnancy has no bearing on the court's prior determination

that Defendant is a danger to the community. The government also disputes Defendant's

contention that her blood sugar level is not being sufficiently tested and that the health of her

unborn children are at risk because of her detention.

Despite Defendant's attempt in her reply to tie her conditions of confinement to the

issue of dangerousness, the court finds that the changed circumstances would not affect the

court's prior determination that she is a danger.1

 Defendant has not made a sufficient

showing to warrant reconsideration of her status and her motion will be denied.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

That Defendant's Motion to Reopen Detention Hearing (Doc. #21) is denied.

DATED this 21st day of November, 2005.

Case 2:05-cr-00271-NVW Document 25 Filed 11/21/05 Page 2 of 2