Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-88-02988/USCOURTS-ca10-88-02988-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
David Wells Edgar
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

FILED 

Unit.ed St.ates Court of Appeals 

Tenth Circnit 

JAN 2 31989 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Clerk 

} 

} 

} 

} 

v . } No. 88-2988 

} (D.C. No. 88-CR-213S} 

DAVID WELLS EDGAR, also known as 

David Wayne Edgerly, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

} (D. Utah} 

} 

} 

} 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT 

Before MOORE, BARRETT, and TACHA, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this 

panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not 

materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. 

App. P. 34(a}; 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The cause is therefore 

ordered submitted without oral argument. 

This is an appeal from an order of pretrial detention entered 

by the district court following de novo review of a prior order of 

detention issued by a United States magistrate. 

Def e ndant-appellant stands charged by indictment with 

po s sessio n with intent to distribute twenty-two kilograms of 

cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 84l(a}(l). The penalty, upon 

Appellate Case: 88-2988 Document: 01019962361 Date Filed: 01/23/1989 Page: 1 
conviction, provided by§ 84l(b)(l)(A), is a sentence of not less 

than ten years. 

The defendant's evidence showed that he lived in the Miami, 

Florida, area, had been married for ten and one-half years to a 

teacher, and was a self-employed painting contractor in that area. 

There was also evidence that defendant, from time to time, took 

vacations and business trips away from home without fully 

disclosing his itinerary to his wife. 

The government's evidence consisted of the testimony of a 

pretrial services officer. He testified that during his initial 

interview with defendant, the defendant furnished false 

information regarding his identity, employment, residence, marital 

status, and family history. Further, at the time of his arrest, 

defendant was in possession of a fictitious driver's license 

issued by the State of California. 

At the conclusion of the hearing, the district court found, 

by clear and convincing evidence, that the defendant was a danger 

to the community and that no conditions of release would 

reasonably assure his appearance and the safety of others. Those 

findings were based on evidence of the amount of cocaine that was 

in the possession of the defendant at the time of his arrest and 

the false information supplied initially to the pretrial services 

officer. In addition, this court's decision was grounded on 

evidence of defendant's travels from his residence in Florida to 

other parts of the country without his wife knowing his itinerary. 

Under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e), there is presumption that no 

conditions of release will reasonably assure defendant's 

2 

Appellate Case: 88-2988 Document: 01019962361 Date Filed: 01/23/1989 Page: 2 
-- ' -

appearance and the safety of the community where there is probable 

cause to believe that defendant has committed a federal drug 

offense carrying a maximum prison term of ten years or more. In 

this case, the offense charged carries a minimum prison term of 

ten years. The presumption of § 3142(e} poses a burden of 

production on the defendant. However, the burden of persuasion 

regarding risk of flight and dangerousness remains on the 

government. 

In our view, defendant failed to show that if released, he 

would not be a risk of flight or a danger to the community. 

The government's showing that the defendant was untruthful 

regarding his background in an effort to avoid initial detention 

and the large amount of contraband involved was more than 

sufficient to meet the government's burden of persuasion. 

We conclude that the detention order should stand. 

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

PER CURIAM 

3 

Appellate Case: 88-2988 Document: 01019962361 Date Filed: 01/23/1989 Page: 3