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

DETENTION ORDER

PAGE -1-

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff, ) CASE NO. CR 05-391 RSM

)

v. )

)

) DETENTION ORDER

IAN FUHR, )

)

Defendant. )

______________________________)

Offense charged: CONSPIRACY TO DISTRIBUTE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES

Date of Detention Hearing: November 22, 2005.

 The Court, having conducted a contested detention hearing pursuant to Title 18

U.S.C. § 3142(f), and based upon the factual findings and statement of reasons for detention

hereafter set forth, finds that no condition or combination of conditions which the defendant

can meet will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant as required and the safety

of any other person and the community. The Government was represented by Ron

Friedman and Rich Cohen. The defendant was represented by Stephen Illa.

Case 2:05-cr-00391-RSM Document 249 Filed 11/25/05 Page 1 of 4
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

DETENTION ORDER

PAGE -2-

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DETENTION

(1) There is probable cause to believe the defendant committed the drug

offense of Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substances. 

The maximum penalty is in excess of ten years. 

There is therefore a rebuttable presumption against the defendant’s

release based upon both dangerousness and flight risk, under Title 18

U.S.C. § 3142(e).

(2) Nothing in this record satisfactorily rebuts the presumption against

release for several reasons: Using the factors below, under Title 18 §

3142 (g), the Court considered the following: 

(a) The nature and circumstances of the offense charged, including

whether the offense is a crime of violence or involves a narcotic

drug. Here, the Defendant Ian Fuhr is alleged to have been the

leader of this conspiracy to distribute cocaine, cocaine base and

oxycodone and marijuana. This conspiracy was investigated

through the use of a court-authorized wiretap. On the wiretap this

defendant was heard arranging for the multiple deliveries of

cocaine from co-defendant Carlos Ford. He also is heard on the

court-authorized wiretap as soliciting the killing of another person

as restitution for a drug debt owed to him. He is alleged to have

purchased ten cell phones to equip other members of the

conspiracy.

(b) The weight of the evidence. Inasmuch as an electronic wiretap

was used in this case with evidence of the defendant’s voice

recorded, along with the use of confidential informants who had 

direct contact with the defendant, the weight of evidence against

Case 2:05-cr-00391-RSM Document 249 Filed 11/25/05 Page 2 of 4
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

DETENTION ORDER

PAGE -3-

this defendant is strong.

(c) The history and characteristics of the person, including:

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, record concerning appearance

at court proceedings, and whether at the time of the current

offense or arrest, the person was on probation, on parole, on

other release pending trial, sentencing, appeal, or completion of

sentence of an offense under Federal, State, or local law. 

Here, the Government points to the defendant’s involvement as

dangerous inasmuch as he is heard soliciting the killing of

another. He also is heard on the wiretap as committing himself as

a “Hoover Crip forever.”

(d) Risk of danger to the community. 

Here the government argues that in addition to the risk of

continued involvement in drug sales and trafficking, this

defendant poses a danger of committing violent crimes against

others. In addition to what is stated above, this defendant’s home

was searched wherein assault weapons and revolvers were seized.

3) Based upon the foregoing information which is consistent with the

recommendation of U.S. Pre-trial Services, it appears that there is no

condition or combination of conditions that would reasonably assure

future Court appearances and/or the safety of other persons or the

community.

Case 2:05-cr-00391-RSM Document 249 Filed 11/25/05 Page 3 of 4
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

DETENTION ORDER

PAGE -4-

It is therefore ORDERED:

(l) The defendant shall be detained pending trial and committed to the

custody of the Attorney General for confinement in a correction facility

separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving

sentences or being held in custody pending appeal;

(2) The defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private

consultation with counsel;

(3) On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for

the Government, the person in charge of the corrections facility in which

the defendant is confined shall deliver the defendant to a United States

Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a court

proceeding; and

(4) The clerk shall direct copies of this order to counsel for the United

States, to counsel for the defendant, to the United States Marshal, and to

the United States Pretrial Services Officer.

DATED this 25th day of November, 2005.

AMONICA J. BENTON

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 2:05-cr-00391-RSM Document 249 Filed 11/25/05 Page 4 of 4