UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

vs.

ROBERT MOORE, 

Defendant.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Case No. 1:18-cr-77

Judge Timothy S. Black

ORDER DENYING 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR BOND

This criminal case is before the Court on Defendant’s motion for release on bond

pending sentencing (Doc. 31) and the Government’s response in opposition (Doc. 32).

I. BACKGROUND

On May 16, 2018, a federal grand jury returned a three-count indictment against 

Defendant Robert Moore, charging him with: possession with intent to distribute 

controlled substances, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C) (Counts 1 and 2); 

and possession of a firearm by a prohibited person (i.e., felon in possession of a firearm), 

in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2) (Count 3). (Doc. 3). As charged, 

Defendant faced a statutory maximum term of up to twenty years in prison on Counts 1 

and 2, as well as up to ten years in prison on Count 3. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C); and 

18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(2).

Based on Defendant’s charges, there was a rebuttable presumption that no bond 

condition or combination of conditions would reasonably assure his appearance or the 

safety of the community. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(3)(A). Moreover, Defendant had at least 

Case: 1:18-cr-00077-TSB Doc #: 40 Filed: 11/20/20 Page: 1 of 5 PAGEID #: 111
2

one outstanding warrant and a pending parole revocation detainer. (Doc. 39 at 5-6).1 

Accordingly, Defendant never contested pretrial detention. (See, e.g., Doc. 12).

On April 11, 2019, Defendant appeared before this Court and entered his plea of 

guilty to Count 3 of the Indictment, pursuant to a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement. (Min. 

Entry, Apr. 11, 2019; Doc. 21). Under the terms of the plea agreement, the parties agreed 

to a proposed binding sentence of 108 months incarceration. (Doc. 21, ¶ 7). The Court 

accepted Defendant’s guilty plea but deferred acceptance of the Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea 

agreement pending the preparation of the Presentence Investigation Report (“PSR”). 

(Min. Entry, Apr. 11, 2019). 

Since that time, Defendant’s PSR has been completed, reflecting a recommended 

Guideline range of 110-120 months.2 The PSR also details Defendant’s egregious 

criminal history, resulting in a Criminal History Category of VI. Further, the PSR notes 

that Defendant does not suffer from any illness, which Defendant has himself confirmed 

in interviews to both U.S. Pretrial and U.S. Probation. (Doc. 39 at 2; PSR, ¶¶ 144-146).

1 On September 9, 2019, this Court granted Defendant’s “release” from federal custody, 

in order to allow him to revert to state custody and resolve his active parole detainer. 

(Doc. 24). The Court once again took custody of Defendant immediately upon resolution 

of his parole. (Doc. 25). Accordingly, Defendant’s “release” served merely as a form of 

transfer, during which Defendant remained in custody at all times. 

2 The Government objects to the Guideline calculation and maintains that Defendant 

qualifies as a career offender. However, given that Defendant faces a statutory maximum 

of 120 months, as well as the terms of the Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement, the outcome 

of the objection is unlikely to have a significant impact on Defendant’s Guidelines range 

and his ultimate sentence. 

Case: 1:18-cr-00077-TSB Doc #: 40 Filed: 11/20/20 Page: 2 of 5 PAGEID #: 112
3

Defendant now moves for release pending sentencing, citing to health concerns 

posed by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. (Doc. 31). The Government opposes 

Defendant’s release, noting that Defendant is neither at high-risk of health complications, 

nor is release appropriate in light of the applicable legal standard. (Doc. 32).

II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(1): 

the judicial officer shall order that a person who has been found 

guilty of an offense and who is awaiting imposition or 

execution of sentence ... be detained, unless the judicial officer 

finds by clear and convincing evidence that the person is not 

likely to flee or pose a danger to the safety of any other person 

or the community if released under section 3142(b) or (c). 

In determining whether any conditions will reasonably assure a defendant’s 

appearance and the safety of the community, the Court must consider the factors set forth 

in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g), including: (1) the nature and circumstances of the alleged 

offense; (2) the weight of the evidence against the defendant; (3) the history and 

characteristics of the defendant; and (4) the nature and seriousness of the danger to any 

person or the community if the defendant is released. 

III. ANALYSIS

The Court acknowledges the significant risk posed by the pandemic, particularly 

to those individuals held in detention. However, it bears repeating that Defendant neither 

suffers from underlying conditions, nor are there any confirmed COVID-19 cases among 

the federal detainees in the Butler County Jail. Thus, absent a showing, by clear and 

Case: 1:18-cr-00077-TSB Doc #: 40 Filed: 11/20/20 Page: 3 of 5 PAGEID #: 113
4

convincing evidence, that Defendant is neither a flight risk nor a danger to the 

community, the Court must order Defendant’s continued detention.

First, the nature and circumstances of the offense are serious. By his own 

admission in the Statement of Facts, Defendant was stopped by police officers for 

traveling 111 MPH in 55 MPH zone, and was found to be driving without a license and in 

possession of both cocaine and a semi-automatic firearm with an extended magazine, 

loaded with 15 rounds of .40 caliber ammunition. (Doc. 21 at 6). The Court 

acknowledges that possession of a firearm is certainly ‘non-violent’ compared to the use

of a firearm. Regardless, particularly given Defendant’s egregious criminal history, the 

Court hardly finds this distinction persuasive. 

Second, as to the weight of the evidence, Defendant has already entered a plea of 

guilty. 

Third, Defendant’s history and characteristics weigh strongly in favor of continued 

detention. To start, Defendant has never held lawful employment and he admits that he 

unlawfully uses marijuana daily. (PSR, ¶¶ 149, 152). More importantly, however, 

Defendant has a lengthy and significant criminal record, which includes criminal 

trespass, breaking and entering, drug possession, aggravated drug trafficking, and 

numerous convictions for weapons under disability. (Id. at ¶¶ 45-103). Defendant also 

has a history of disciplinary issues while incarcerated, as well as a history of failure to 

abide by supervision and violations of probation and parole. (Id.) Moreover, Defendant 

has served significant terms of imprisonment for some of his prior offenses, and yet 

appears to be undeterred by the threat of further incarceration. (Id.) Accordingly, the 

Case: 1:18-cr-00077-TSB Doc #: 40 Filed: 11/20/20 Page: 4 of 5 PAGEID #: 114
5

Court cannot conclude that any conditions of bond would ensure Defendant’s 

compliance. 

Finally, the Court must consider the nature and seriousness of the danger to any 

person or the community if the defendant is released. Given Defendant’s history, the 

seriousness of the instant offense, and the lengthy term of imprisonment Defendant 

currently faces, the Court finds that Defendant poses a risk of flight and poses a 

significant risk to the safety of the community. 

Having considered the statutory factors, the Court finds that, despite the ongoing 

pandemic, Defendant’s continued detention is warranted. 

Accordingly, Defendant’s motion for bond (Doc. 31) is DENIED and Defendant 

Robert Moore SHALL remain detained pending sentencing. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: 11/20/2020 s/ Timothy S. Black

Timothy S. Black

United States District Judge

Case: 1:18-cr-00077-TSB Doc #: 40 Filed: 11/20/20 Page: 5 of 5 PAGEID #: 115