UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA :

 : 4:CR-06-0053-10

v. : 

:

THOMAS S. RONEY, JR. : (Judge Muir)

OPINION

MUIR, District Judge

I. Introduction.

On February 9, 2006, a federal grand jury returned a

fourteen-count indictment charging eleven defendants with various

violations of the Controlled Substances Act. Defendant Thomas S.

Roney, Jr., is one of those Defendants and he has been detained

pending trial. On March 10, 2006, Roney pled not guilty to the

charges against him.

On June 6, 2006, Roney filed a motion for a hearing on the

issue of whether he may be released pending trial. On June 6,

2006, we granted that motion and scheduled the hearing for June

9, 2006. The hearing commenced and concluded on that date. At

the conclusion of the hearing we agreed to allow the parties

until Wednesday, June 14, 2006, to file their annotations to the

opposing party’s proposed findings of facts and conclusions of

law. The government’s annotations were timely filed. Although

Roney filed his annotations on June 15, 2006, we will accept them

as having been timely filed.

Following are the court’s findings of fact, discussion, and

Case 4:06-cr-00053-JEJ Document 107 Filed 06/16/06 Page 1 of 11
2

conclusions of law. Factual findings and legal conclusions which

are not disputed are noted with a “U” in parenthesis after each

such finding or conclusion. The factual finding noted with a

“U/O” in parenthesis was objected to by the government. We

overrule that objection.

No briefs have been filed in connection with Roney’s motion

to be released pending trial. However, because the parties do

not dispute the governing law, we will proceed to rule on the

motion.

II. Findings of fact.

1. Defendant Thomas Roney, Jr., was convicted of three

criminal offenses as a juvenile and has committed 14

criminal offenses as an adult.

2. Roney is addicted to heroin [and] has committed prior

crimes and has violated the terms and conditions of

parole supervision as a result of and in an effort to

supply his addiction. (U)

3. On May 7, 2005, Roney was convicted of the felony drug

offense of delivery of a controlled substance in

Montour County, Pennsylvania. (U)

4. Roney’s parole was revoked in Montour County on March

30, 2005. (U)

5. While on parole prior to March 30, 2005, Roney was

ordered to pay fines and costs. (U)

Case 4:06-cr-00053-JEJ Document 107 Filed 06/16/06 Page 2 of 11
3

6. While on parole prior to March 15, 2005, Roney was

employed for a period of time at Burger King. (U)

7. Roney failed to make any payment towards his fines and

costs while on parole prior to March 15, 2005. (U)

8. Roney failed to appear for appointments with the

Montour County Probation Office while released on

parole prior to March 15, 2005. (U)

9. Roney failed a drug test which was positive to opiates

and cocaine while on parole prior to March 15, 2005. 

(U)

10. Roney also violated the terms of his parole by failing

to obtain treatment for his addiction to heroin.

11. The Montour County Adult Probation Office has not

utilized global positioning, electronic monitoring or

electronic galvanic skin drug testing in the past to

supervise Roney. (U)

12. On June 1, 2006, Roney served his maximum sentence of

imprisonment in the Montour County Correctional

Facility after a parole revocation. (U)

13. Roney is under supervision of the adult probation

office of Montour County until June 2008, at which time

a consecutive two-year probationary period commences in

Lycoming County. (U)

14. Under the supervision of Montour County, if released by

Case 4:06-cr-00053-JEJ Document 107 Filed 06/16/06 Page 3 of 11
4

this court, Roney will be subject to random drug

testing, monthly reporting, mandated job search,

payment of costs and fines, limitations on travel, and

completion of community service. (U/O)

15. Roney has no history of fleeing the jurisdiction of

Montour County or failing to appear for required court

appearances during his criminal record dating back to

August 2001.

16. On August 2, 2005, Roney was released from jail in

Montour County and was serving his term for parole

revocation. (U)

17. The indictment in this case, in Count 13, charges Roney

with the distribution of heroin on August 12, 2005. 

(U)

18. Roney is facing up to life imprisonment if convicted of

Count One, Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to

Distribute and Distribution of a Controlled Substance,

and Count Thirteen Possession with Intent to Distribute

and Distribution of Heroin of the Indictment filed

February 9, 2006. (U)

19. There is probable cause, based upon Count 13 of the

indictment, that Roney distributed heroin 10 days after

being released from Montour County Jail for a parole

violation. (U)

Case 4:06-cr-00053-JEJ Document 107 Filed 06/16/06 Page 4 of 11
5

20. On September 9, 2005, a Montour County Probation

Officer searched Roney’s residence at 213 Center

Street, Danville, Pennsylvania, while Roney was on

parole and recovered 27 packets of heroin, the

prescription drug Vicodin, marijuana, and drug

paraphernalia.

21. On September 9, 2005, Roney was arrested and refused to

submit to a urine test as required by the terms of his

release.

22. Five days later Roney admitted that he had been using

heroin before being arrested on September 9, 2005.

23. Roney did not advise Montour County Probation Officer

James Miller that he had been using heroin when he was

arrested.

24. Roney did not pay any of his costs and fines while on

parole prior to September 30, 2005. (U)

25. Roney would reside with his parents in Montour County

or any residence approved by Federal Probation if

released prior to trial.

26. Roney’s mother is presently on parole for a drug

trafficking crime.

27. Roney’s father has been convicted of a drug trafficking

crime.

28. If released by this court, Roney would be subjected to

Case 4:06-cr-00053-JEJ Document 107 Filed 06/16/06 Page 5 of 11
6

the supervision of Federal Probation as well as Montour

County Adult Probation. (U)

III. Discussion.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 3142, entitled “Release or detention of a

defendant pending trial,” controls our disposition of Roney’s

motion to be released on bail. Roney argues that he should be

released pending his trial because 1) he has never missed a prior

court date throughout the course of his prior experiences with

the criminal judicial system, and 2) a new combination of

conditions imposed upon him, such as close monitoring by way of

an ankle bracelet or global positioning system, justify his

release pending trial. 

Subparagraph (e) of § 3142, entitled “Detention,” provides

in relevant part that

[i]f, after a hearing ..., the judicial officer finds that

no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably

assure the appearance of the person as required and the

safety of any other person and the community, such judicial

officer shall order the detention of the person before

trial.

. . . 

Subject to rebuttal by the person, it shall be presumed that

no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably

assure the appearance of the person as required and the

safety of the community if the judicial officer finds that

there is probable cause to believe that the person committed

an offense for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten

years or more is prescribed in the Controlled Substances Act

(21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), ....

18 U.S.C. § 3142(e). We note that clear and convincing evidence

of the factors enunciated in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e) is required. 

Case 4:06-cr-00053-JEJ Document 107 Filed 06/16/06 Page 6 of 11
7

The statutory presumption, in and of itself, is not sufficient to

detain Roney pending trial. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(the

conclusion that no condition or combination of conditions will

reasonably assure the safety of any other person and the

community shall be supported by clear and convincing evidence).

The information relating to our determination of “whether

there are conditions of release that will reasonably assure the

appearance of the person as required and the safety of any other

person and the community” concerns

(1) [t]he nature and circumstances of the offense charged,

including whether the offense is a crime of violence or

involves a narcotic drug;

(2) the weight of the evidence against the person;

(3) the history and characteristics of the person, ...; 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). 

Our analysis begins with the observation that the conspiracy

alleged in the indictment involves a total of eleven defendants

who are alleged to have distributed heroin in protected zones

(within 1,000 feet of public and private elementary and secondary

schools, and within housing owned by a public housing authority). 

Some of the co-defendants allegedly possessed firearms in

connection with the conspiracy and more than one kilogram of

heroin was involved. As Roney concedes, the indictment

constitutes probable cause that the offenses were committed.

The next factors to consider are Roney’s history and

Case 4:06-cr-00053-JEJ Document 107 Filed 06/16/06 Page 7 of 11
8

characteristics. Roney has accumulated a substantial record of

prior criminal offenses. He admits that his criminal conduct is

caused by, or at least closely related to, his addiction to

heroin. Roney’s failure to obtain drug treatment while

previously on parole indicates that his addiction, and a

motivating force to commit crimes, may well remain.

Roney’s record of compliance with the conditions of his

parole in Montour County does not inspire any confidence in the

conclusion that he will comply with any condition imposed upon if

released in this case. In a relatively short period of time

Roney violated the terms of his parole by failing to make

payments towards his fine and costs, failing a drug test, failing

to obtain treatment for his drug addiction, and failing to keep

appointments with his probation officer. Roney’s difficulties

here lie in his inability to comply with the conditions of his

release, as opposed to the methods by which he is supervised.

We are of the view that the clear and convincing evidence

presented to us justifies Roney’s continued detention pending his

trial. While it may be true that he never violated the terms of

his probation in Montour County by fleeing while any state charge

was pending against him, that may merely reflect the relatively

insignificant potential sentences resulting from those charges. 

The lengthiest sentence of incarceration previously imposed upon

Roney was 5 to 111⁄2 months; in contrast, Roney now faces a maximum

Case 4:06-cr-00053-JEJ Document 107 Filed 06/16/06 Page 8 of 11
9

sentence of imprisonment for life.

We can envision no condition or combination of conditions of

pretrial release which will reasonably assure the appearance of

Roney and the safety of other persons and the community as

required.

III. Conclusions of law.

1. Under 18 U.S.C. §§ 3142(f)(1) and (e)(1), the Defendant

is charged with a violation of the Controlled

Substances Act for which there is a maximum term of

imprisonment of ten (10) years or more, and

consequently there is a rebuttable presumption that no

condition or combination of conditions will reasonably

assure the appearance of the Defendant as required and

the safety of others in the community.

2. The defendant has failed to rebut the above presumption

based on the nature of the offenses charged in the

indictment.

3. The record contains clear and convincing evidence that

no condition or combination of conditions will

reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant as

required and the safety of other persons and the

Case 4:06-cr-00053-JEJ Document 107 Filed 06/16/06 Page 9 of 11
10

community.

An appropriate order will be entered.

s/Malcolm Muir 

MUIR, U.S. District Judge

DATE: June 16, 2006

MM:ga 

Case 4:06-cr-00053-JEJ Document 107 Filed 06/16/06 Page 10 of 11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA :

 : 4:CR-06-0053-10

v. : 

:

THOMAS S. RONEY, JR. : (Judge Muir)

ORDER

June 16, 2006

Roney’s motion to be released pending trial (Document 97) is

denied.

s/Malcolm Muir 

MUIR, U.S. District Judge

MM:ga

Case 4:06-cr-00053-JEJ Document 107 Filed 06/16/06 Page 11 of 11