16-3168-cr 

United States v. Fagan 

1 

16-3168-cr 

United States v. Fagan 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT 

SUMMARY ORDER 

Rulings by summary order do not have precedential effect. Citation to a summary order filed 

on or after January 1, 2007, is permitted and is governed by Federal Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 32.1 and this Court’s Local Rule 32.1.1. When citing a summary order in a 

document filed with this Court, a party must cite either the Federal Appendix or an 

electronic database (with the notation “summary order”). A party citing a summary order 

must serve a copy of it on any party not represented by counsel. 

At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at 

the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, 

on the 31st day of January, two thousand seventeen. 

PRESENT: RALPH K. WINTER, 

JOSÉ A. CABRANES,

GERARD E. LYNCH, 

Circuit Judges. 

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Appellee, 16-3168-cr 

v. 

BRADLEY FAGAN, 

Defendant-Appellant, 

 

FOR APPELLEE: Jordan Estes, Assistant United States 

Attorneys, for Preet Bharara, United States 

Attorney for the Southern District of New 

York, New York, NY. 

FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT: Susan K. Marcus and Grainne E. O’Neill, 

Law Offices of Susan K. Marcus, New 

York, NY. 

Appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New 

York (Katherine Polk Failla, Judge). 
16-3168-cr 

United States v. Fagan 

2 

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, 

ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the September 8, 2016 order of the District Court be and 

hereby is AFFIRMED.

 Defendant-appellant Bradley Fagan appeals from an order denying him bail pending trial on 

an eight-count indictment charging, among other things, five counts of distributing and possessing 

with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine or 500 grams or more of a mixture 

or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 812, 

841(a)(1), and 841(b)(1)((A), and one count of possessing firearms in furtherance of a narcotics 

offense, in violation of 18 U.S.C § 924(c). After hearing argument on Fagan’s bail application, the 

District Court denied Fagan’s request, holding that he had failed to rebut the presumption that 

detention is appropriate pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(2). The District Court considered the 

relevant factors, including (1) the nature of the charges, (2) Fagan’s possession in his home of a 

loaded semiautomatic submachine gun and a loaded .38 caliber revolver, and (3) the strength of the 

government’s case, and concluded that Fagan represented a danger to the community. See United 

States v. Mercedes, 254 F.3d 433, 436 (2d Cir. 2001). Upon careful review of the record, we conclude 

that the District Court did not err in denying Fagan’s application for bail. 

CONCLUSION 

We have considered all of the arguments raised by defendant-appellant on appeal and find 

them to be without merit. For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM the September 8, 2016 order of 

the District Court. 

 FOR THE COURT: 

 Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk