[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 15-15091

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 8:15-cr-00320-SDM-TGW-3

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

PRISCILLA ANN ELLIS, 

 Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

________________________

(April 1, 2016)

Before WILSON, WILLIAM PRYOR and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Case: 15-15091 Date Filed: 04/01/2016 Page: 1 of 4 
2

Priscilla Ann Ellis appeals an order that continued her detention pending 

trial, as provided under the Bail Reform Act. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(b), (e). The 

district court ruled that Ellis’s associates and access to funds would enable her to 

flee the country to avoid trial for conspiring to commit mail and wire fraud, id.

§ 1349, and conspiring to commit international money laundering, id. § 1956(h), 

and that she presented a danger to elderly and other vulnerable persons. Because 

the record supports the finding that Ellis was a flight risk, we need not address the 

alternative finding that she posed a danger to the public. We affirm.

The continuation of pretrial detention presents a mixed question of law and 

fact. We review findings of fact for clear error and the application of law to those 

facts de novo. United States v. King, 849 F.2d 485, 487 (11th Cir. 1988). The 

district court has “substantial latitude in determining whether pretrial detention is 

appropriate.” Id.

When a district court conducts an evidentiary hearing and “finds that no 

condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of [a 

defendant] as required and the safety of any other person and the community,” the

defendant must be detained before trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e). Either ground may 

support the order of detention. King, 849 F.2d at 488. To determine whether the 

defendant poses a flight risk, the district court must consider several factors, 

including (1) the “nature and circumstances” of the charged offense, (2) the weight 

Case: 15-15091 Date Filed: 04/01/2016 Page: 2 of 4 
3

of the evidence against the defendant, (3) the defendant’s history and 

characteristics, including her character, her family and community ties, her past 

conduct, her criminal history, and her “record concerning appearance at court 

proceedings,” and (4) the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or the 

community that would be posed by the person’s release. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g).

The district court did not err in determining that Ellis should be detained 

because she presents a serious risk of flight. See id. § 3142(e). The district court 

found that Ellis understood the consequences of her charges, having been 

convicted previously of mail fraud, and that she had an incentive and ability to flee 

to avoid a potential sentence of imprisonment for life. The government proffered 

that emails, photographs, and travel documents established that Ellis had

relationships and resources that would facilitate her flight. Those proffers 

established that Ellis had used an international counterfeiter to extend the 

expiration date on her passport and to create false documents for other members of 

her conspiracy; she had traveled frequently to Europe and Asia, where she had 

established or had access to bank accounts; and she had professed to be worth

more than $7.8 million, with $480,000 in liquid assets. Ellis argues that the 

government failed to “call . . . witnesses [or] present[] . . . actual evidence” to

satisfy its burden of proof, but she acknowledges that the government was allowed 

to proceed by proffer. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f); United States v. Gaviria, 828 F.2d 

Case: 15-15091 Date Filed: 04/01/2016 Page: 3 of 4 
4

667, 669 (11th Cir. 1987). Ellis also argues that her medical condition, family ties, 

and status as a veteran weighed in favor of release, but the district court was 

entitled to conclude that Ellis’s “significant overseas resources and connections”

and her “criminal history and her character establish a preponderant risk of flight.”

The district court also did not clearly err in finding that no condition or 

combination of conditions would reasonably assure Ellis’s appearance. See 18 

U.S.C. § 3142(f). Ellis offered to surrender her passport, but that would not 

eliminate the risk of flight, the district court found, because Ellis had “access to 

sources world-wide to obtain false travel documents.” And the government 

proffered that Ellis had misrepresented that she had not traveled internationally for 

several years because travel documents established that she went abroad repeatedly 

in 2014 and in 2015. The district court reasonably determined that no measure 

short of detention would guarantee Ellis’s presence at trial.

We AFFIRM the decision to continue Ellis’s pretrial detention.

Case: 15-15091 Date Filed: 04/01/2016 Page: 4 of 4