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

ORDER AFFIRMING MAGISTRATE 

JUDGE’S DETENTION ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

RICHARD ALLEN FABEL,

Defendant.

Case No. CR06-41RSL

ORDER AFFIRMING MAGISTRATE

JUDGE’S DETENTION ORDER 

This matter comes before the Court on defendant’s “Motion to Review Order of

Detention” (Dkt. # 86). The Honorable James P. Donohue, United States Magistrate Judge,

issued the April 10, 2006 detention order after determining that defendant posed a danger to the

community. 

The Court has reviewed the transcript of the February 16, 2006 detention hearing before

the Honorable Cynthia Imbrogno, United States Magistrate Judge in Spokane; defendant’s

motion for revocation of the detention order; the Government’s opposition to revocation of the

detention order; the recorded April 10, 2006 detention hearing before Judge Donohue and the

remainder of the record. It considers de novo the detention order issued by Judge Donohue. 

U.S. v. Koenig, 912 F.2d 1190, 1191 (9th Cir. 1990). 

Case 2:06-cr-00041-RSL Document 120 Filed 06/19/06 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

ORDER AFFIRMING MAGISTRATE 

JUDGE’S DETENTION ORDER - 2

The Court will detain defendant prior to trial if it determines “that no condition or

combination of conditions will reasonably assure . . . the safety of any other person and the

community.” 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e). Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g), the Court considers four

factors when deciding if defendant is a danger to the community: “(1) [t]he nature and

circumstances of the offense charged . . . (2) the weight of the evidence against the person; (3)

the history and characteristics of the person . . . (4) the nature and seriousness of the danger to

any person or the community that would be posed by the person’s release.” The Government

bears the burden of establishing “by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant poses a

danger to the community.” United States v. Gebro, 948 F.2d 1118, 1121 (9th Cir. 1991). 

 The Court finds by clear and convincing evidence that defendant poses a danger to the

community. Defendant is charged with numerous crimes including racketeering, conspiracy to

murder in aid of racketeering, murder in aid of racketeering and witness tampering. Although

the Government has indicated that it does not intend to seek the death penalty, defendant’s

murder count is a capital crime. As President of the Washington Nomads Chapter of the Hells

Angels Motorcycle Club and West Coast Regional President of the Hells Angels, the defendant

has a great deal of power to cause intimidation of witnesses. His recent arrest in Spokane led to

the discovery of dangerous weapons in his residence, including loaded firearms. These facts

clearly demonstrate that defendant poses a significant risk to individuals involved in this trial

and to the community at large.

For all of the foregoing reasons, defendant’s “Motion to Review Order of Detention”

(Dkt. #86) is DENIED. 

DATED this 19th day of June, 2006.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge 

Case 2:06-cr-00041-RSL Document 120 Filed 06/19/06 Page 2 of 2