DETENTION ORDER 

CR 17-00002 JST

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

27

28

 

DAVID L. ANDERSON (CABN 149604) 

United States Attorney 

HALLIE HOFFMAN (CABN 210020) 

Chief, Criminal Division 

 

LEAH PAISNER (NJBN 175362015) 

Special Assistant United States Attorney 

1301 Clay Street, Suite 340S 

Oakland, California 94612 

Telephone: (510) 637-3680 

FAX: (510) 637-3724 

Leah.Paisner@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for United States of America 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

OAKLAND DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

MICHAEL JAMES SPINGOLA, 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

CASE NO. CR 17-00002 JST (TSH) 

 

DETENTION ORDER 

Case 4:17-cr-00002-JST Document 46 Filed 08/06/20 Page 1 of 3
DETENTION ORDER 

 CR 17-00002 JST 1 

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

27

28

On February 4, 2020, a Petition for Arrest Warrant for Offender Under Supervision was filed, 

charging the defendant with violating the terms of his supervised released. Dkt. 39. On August 4, 2020, 

the defendant appeared before the Court for a detention hearing on the violation petition. Dkt. 42. The 

defendant appeared by Zoom video teleconference from Santa Rita Jail and was in custody at the time of 

the hearing. The defendant was represented by Joyce Leavitt of the Federal Public Defender’s Office. 

Special Assistant United States Attorney Leah Paisner appeared for the government. The government 

moved for detention, and the defendant opposed. The defendant moved for release to either his father’s 

house or a halfway house, which both the government and the U.S. Probation Office opposed. At the 

hearing, the parties submitted proffers and arguments regarding detention, particularly with respect to 

the defendant’s risk of non-appearance. 

Upon consideration of the facts, proffers and arguments presented, and for the reasons stated on 

the record, the Court finds that the defendant has failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence 

that there is any condition or combination of conditions that will reasonably ensure his appearance at 

future proceedings. Accordingly, the defendant must be detained pending resolution of the violation 

petition. 

The present order supplements the Court’s findings and order at the detention hearing and serves 

as written findings of fact and a statement of reasons as required by Title 18, United States Code, 

Section 3143(a) and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1(a)(6). As noted on the record, the Court 

makes the following finding as the basis for its conclusion that no condition or combination of 

conditions will reasonably mitigate the defendant’s risk of non-appearance: 

The Court considered as factors supporting its conclusion: (1) the defendant’s history of 

absconding while on federal supervision, including the conduct underlying Charges Two and Three in 

the petition; (2) the defendant’s poor history of complying with his probation officer’s instructions while 

on federal supervision; and (3) the lack of a suitable release plan. The Court also noted that while the 

defendant has resided in the Bay Area his entire life, his history of violations underscores his high risk 

of non-appearance at future proceedings. For these and all the reasons and discussion on the record, the 

Court granted the government’s motion for detention, finding that the defendant failed to meet his 

Case 4:17-cr-00002-JST Document 46 Filed 08/06/20 Page 2 of 3
DETENTION ORDER 

 CR 17-00002 JST 2 

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

27

28

burden to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he did not pose a risk of non-appearance. 

Therefore, the Court therefore concluded that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably 

ensure his appearance at future proceedings. 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a), IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

1. The defendant be, and hereby is, committed to the custody of the Attorney General for 

confinement in a corrections facility; 

2. The defendant be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with counsel; 

and 

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 an authorized United States Marshal for the purpose of any appearance in connection with a 

court proceeding. 

IT SO ORDERED. 

DATED: August 6, 2020 _____________________________________ 

 HON. THOMAS S. HIXSON 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 4:17-cr-00002-JST Document 46 Filed 08/06/20 Page 3 of 3