"% AO 472 (Rev. 12/03) Order ofDetention Pending Trial 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 

Eastern District of Michigan 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

V. 

AKIL JUMA YOUNG 

Defendant 

ORDER O

Case Number: 

F DETEN

09-20105 

TION PENDING TRIAL 

In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18U.S.C. § 3142(f),a detention hearinghas been held. I concludethat the following facts require the 

detentionofthe defendantpending trial in this case. 

Part I-Findings of Fact 

o	 (I) The defendantis charged with an offensedescribedin 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(I) and has been convicted ofa D federaloffense D state 

or local offense that would have been a federaloffense if a circumstance giving rise to federaljurisdiction had existed- that is 

D a crimeof violence as defmed in 18 U.S.C. § 3156(a)(4). 

D an offensefor which the maximumsentenceis life imprisonment or death. 

D an offense for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed in 

* 

D	 a felony that was committedafter the defendanthad been convictedof two or more prior federal offensesdescribedin 18 U.S.c. 

§ 3142(f)(1)(A)-(C), or comparablestate or local offenses. 

o	 (2) The offensedescribed in fmding (1) was committedwhile the defendantwas on release pending trial for a federal, state or local offense. 

o	 (3) A period of not more than five years has elapsed since the 0 date of conviction 0 release ofthe defendantfromimprisonment 

for the offense described in finding (I). 

o	 (4) FindingsNos. (1), (2) and (3) establish a rebuttablepresumptionthat no conditionor combinationof conditionswill reasonablyassure the 

safety of (an) other person(s) and the community. I further fmd that the defendanthas not rebutted this presumption. 

Alternative Findings (A) 

lit (1) There is probable cause to believe that the defendanthas committed an offense 

for which a maximum term of imprisonmentoften years or more is prescribed in _T_it_le_2_1	 _ 

under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). lit (2) The defendanthasnot rebutted the presumption establishedby finding(1) thatno conditionor combinationof conditions willreasonablyassure 

the appearanceof the defendant as required and the safety of the community. 

Alternative Findings (B) 

o	 (1) There is a serious risk that the defendant will not appear. 

o	 (2) There is a serious risk that the defendantwill endangerthe safety of another person or the community. 

Part II-Written Statement of Reasons for Detention 

I find that the credible testimony and informationsubmitted at the hearingestablishesby riIclear and convincingevidence 0 a preponderanceofthe evidence that 

there are no conditions or combination of conditions that will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant as required and the 

safety of the community, considering the factors listed in Title 18, United States Code, section 3142(g). The following pages contain 

a more detailed explanation of the reasons for this determination. 

Part III-Directions Regarding Detention 

Thedefendantiscommittedtothe custodyof theAttorneyGeneralorhisdesignatedrepresentativefor confinementina correctionsfacilityseparate, 

to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal. The defendantshall be afforded a 

reasonable opportunity for private consultation with defense counsel. On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the 

Government,the person in charge ofthe corrections facility shall deliver the defendantto the United Statesmarshal for the purposeof an appearance 

in connectionwith a court proceeding. 

3~0~009 s/Michael Hluchaniuk
 

Date Signature ofJudge
 

Michael Hluchaniuk	 U.S. Magistrate Judge 

Name and Tille ofJudge 

*Insert as applicable: (a) Controlled SubstancesAct (21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.); (b) Controlled SubstancesImport and ExportAct (21 U.S.C. § 951 

et seq.); or (c) Section 1 of Act of Sept. 15, 1980 (21 U.S.c. § 955a). 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 1 of 16 Pg ID 72
Akil Juma Young 

Case No. 09-20105 

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DETENTION 

Defendant Akil Juma Young was arrested on February 25,2009. The 

following day a complaint was filed alleging that defendant and Johnny Earl-Milo 

Taylor, II, conspired to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 100 

kilograms or more of marijuana. Defendant had his initial appearance in Court on 

the complaint on February 27,2009. At that time, the government moved for 

detention and a detention hearing was scheduled for March 6, 2009, based on the 

request of defendant's attorney. 

Defendant was indicted on March 4,2009, and charged with one count of 

possession with intent to distribute 100 kilograms or more of marijuana and one 

count of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. The 

drug offense carries a statutory mandatory minimum sentence of five years and a 

40 year maximum sentence. The firearm offense carries a statutory mandatory 

minimum of five years, consecutive to any other sentence, and a life maximum 

sentence. 

The facts proffered by the government during the detention hearing relating 

to the events of February 25, 2009, indicate that two vehicles, a Yukon and a Ford 

Page 2 of 16 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 2 of 16 Pg ID 73
pick-up, were seen near an apartment identified as 1303 Sixth Street in Flint. 

Those vehicles were later seen at a residence on Birch Lane in Davisburg, 

subsequently determined to be defendant's residence. The two vehicles left the 

Birch Lane residence and a Jeep arrived, pulling a trailer. The trailer was backed 

up to the garage and it appeared to surveillance officers that items were being 

unloaded from the trailer into the garage. The Yukon and the pick-up separately 

returned to the residence and then left again. The pick-up driver, later identified 

as defendant, spoke with the driver of the Jeep as it drove away from the 

residence. The Yukon and the pick-up again left the Birch Lane residence with 

the Yukon returning to the 1303 Sixth Street location. Officers approached the 

Sixth Street residence and encountered two individuals who fled as the officers 

approached. One of those individuals was caught and arrested and is a codefendant in the present indictment. The Yukon was searched and approximately 

100 pounds of marijuana was found inside. It was found inside a duffle bag 

similar to four empty duffle bags inside the residence and also similar to the duffle 

bags containing marijuana found at Birch Lane. Also found inside the Sixth Street 

residence were drug trafficking paraphernalia and two firearms. A search at Birch 

Lane resulted in the seizure of approximately 1000 pounds of marijuana in the 

garage along with a scale and money counter inside the residence and four 

Page 3 of 16 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 3 of 16 Pg ID 74
handguns, two of which were loaded. Documents with defendant's real name and 

his alias were found inside the residence. 

At the detention hearing, the government also proffered that defendant 

should be detained based on several factors including: (1) the presumption in 

favor of detention based on the charges defendant was facing; (2) the fact that 

defendant was facing both drug and firearm charges; (3) the fact that, in February 

of 2009, defendant's residence was found to contain over 1000 pounds of 

marijuana (a quantity of controlled substances that was valued by the government 

to be worth over $1,000,000 based on a street value of $1,000 per pound), four 

handguns including one with an obliterated serial number, a set of scales, and a 

money counter; (4) the fact that, in August of 2005, a package containing over 50 

pounds of marijuana was sent to a post office box in the Flint area that was linked 

to defendant; (5) the fact that, in January of 2007, defendant was confronted on a 

train in New Mexico by DEA agents and in the same sleeper car in which 

defendant was riding, approximately $230,000 in cash was found and defendant 

had approximately $11,000 in cash on his person; (6) in January of 2008, 

defendant was in a motor home that was stopped in New Mexico and found to 

contain approximately $48,000 in cash, a second person in the motor home was 

David Hall, who had also been present on the train when the cash was found in 

Page 4 of 16 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 4 of 16 Pg ID 75
defendant's presence in January of 2008; (7) that defendant had used an alias of 

Chris Sanders at various times; and (8) that defendant had been linked to several 

residences in the Flint area. 

Defendant proffered that he had lived in the Flint area most of his life, his 

former wife and child lived in the Flint area, he had been a Flint police officer for 

several years, he owned a business in Flint for a period oftime, he was currently 

employed as the owner of a minor league basketball team in Atlanta, Georgia, he 

was not at his residence on Birch Lane when the large amount ofmarijuana was 

delivered there, and the 50 plus pounds ofmarijuana sent to the post office box 

were not connected to him. Defense counsel acknowledged that defendant had 

used an alias in the past, but contended its use was innocuous and not illegal in 

nature. Defense counsel asked for a continuance of the hearing to attempt to 

obtain the testimony of some witnesses and to obtain documentation regarding the 

defendant's current income. 

Defendant filed a memorandum in support ofhis request for pretrial release 

on March 10,2009 (Dkt. 12), and a supplemental memorandum in support ofhis 

request for pretrial release, also on March 10,2009. (Dkt. 13). These pleadings 

portrayed defendant as a caring individual who was close to his family, engaged in 

positive activities in the community and who had the support and trust of 

Page 5 of 16 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 5 of 16 Pg ID 76
numerous people in the community, many ofwhom wrote letters ofsupport that 

were attached to the memoranda. 

The detention hearing was resumed on March 13, 2009. Defendant called 

his former spouse, Tabatha Young, to the witness stand. Ms. Young testified that 

she shared custody of defendant's daughter with defendant and that defendant was 

involved in the life of their eight-year old child. Ms. Young thought that 

defendant was dependable and that he would show up for future court 

proceedings. However, Ms. Young did not know much about defendant's 

residences or his employment since their divorce in 2005. 

Defendant testified on his own behalf and stated that he felt intimidated by 

the pretrial services officer who had interviewed him and, as a result, was evasive 

about his residence during the interview. Defendant further testified that his 

family moved to Flint from New York in 1990 and that he attended high school in 

Flint, earning good grades. He also indicated he went to college, but did not 

graduate and then returned to Flint in 1995. He became a Flint police officer in 

1996 and worked in that capacity until 2001, when he was charged with an assault 

offense, which was later dismissed. He later worked at an electronic data system 

company and a grocery store where he held manager positions in both locations. 

He then opened an adult foster care business in late 2005 or early 2006 and 

Page 6 of 16 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 6 of 16 Pg ID 77
operated that until March of 2007. Defendant said that he did not have a regular 

residence at one point in time and opened a post office box for the purpose of 

receiving mail. 

He considered leaving Flint based on the difficulty he had arising from the 

criminal charges that were later dropped and the ensuing negative publicity he 

received. He attempted to set up a business in Atlanta and while there, he became 

involved in the World Basketball Association, eventually buying his own team in 

that league in August of 2008. 

He admitted that he began using the alias Chris Sanders in 2007 because he 

suffered financial hardship after losing his job as a police officer in 200 I and he 

wanted a "fresh start." He claimed that he only used the name "sporadically" and 

did not carry the false identification with him that the government apparently 

found during the search of his residence. 

Defendant denied knowing anything about the post office box where the 

marijuana was sent to in 2005 and claimed that his brother must have signed some 

of the documents with the Chris Sanders name on them, which were found in his 

residence on Birch Lane. He claimed that he had no reason to leave the area 

because that is where his family lived. 

Regarding the Chris Sanders alias, defendant said he used it to "establish 

Page 7 of 16 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 7 of 16 Pg ID 78
credit" and he also had the utility bill for an apartment at 1303 Sixth Street in Flint 

set up in the Sanders name. Defendant characterized that apartment as a "resting 

spot" where he would stay from time-to-time, but he denied ever living there. 

On cross-examination, defendant aclmowledged that the post office box 

where the marijuana was sent (which he denied lmowing anything about on direct 

examination), was actually a post office box that he had set up in conjunction with 

the operation of the adult foster care business. The marijuana that had been sent to 

that post office box was addressed to the corporate name of defendant's adult 

foster care business at that address. 

Defendant further aclmowledged that, in order to obtain the false Chris 

Sanders identification, he had paid someone who introduced him to a corrupt 

employee of the Michigan Secretary of State office, who lmowingly provided him 

with false identification documents issued by the State of Michigan. Additionally, 

defendant had purchased airline tickets in this false name and had stayed in hotels 

under the false name. 

Defendant admitted that he had falsified information in a rental application, 

using his own name, relating to a place of employment and the amount of income 

he claimed to be earning. He also admitted to the use of a second post office box 

for the purposes ofreceiving mail. These "post office boxes" were mail boxes 

Page 8 of 16 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 8 of 16 Pg ID 79
provided by a commercial service and used what would appear to be a normal 

street address, when in reality, they were just a box where one picked up mail. 

A defendant should be released on bond unless it is determined that there 

are no conditions or combinations of conditions that will reasonably assure the 

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

community. 18 U.S.C. § 3l42(e)(l). A person charged with certain offenses is 

subject to a rebuttable presumption in favor of detention. 18 U.S.C. § 3l42(e)(3). 

Those offenses include drug offenses for which the maximum term of 

imprisonment is ten years or more and an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). 18 

U.S.C. § 3142(e)(3)(A) and (B). Defendant is charged with a drug offense 

meeting that criteria and an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) and, therefore, the 

rebuttable presumption in favor of detention is applicable to the present case. 

The factors to be considered in determining whether a defendant should be 

released on bond or detained are found in § 3l42(g) and, while the facts relating to 

a defendant being a flight risk must be proved by a preponderance of the evidence, 

the facts associated with a defendant being a danger to the community must be 

proved by clear and convincing evidence. 18 U.S.C. § 3l42(f). 

While a defendant may rebut the presumption in favor of detention, the 

"presumption in favor of detention does not vanish simply because a defendant 

Page 9 of 16 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 9 of 16 Pg ID 80
comes forward with evidence to rebut it. Were the presumption to vanish, 'courts 

wold be giving too little deference to Congress' findings regarding this class. The 

court may continue to give the presumption some weight by keeping in mind that 

Congress has determined 'that drug offenders pose a special risk of flight and 

dangerousness to society.'" United States v. Lattner, 23 Fed.Appx. 363, 364 (6th 

Cir. 2001) (internal citation omitted). 

"Danger to the community" includes more than just the risk that one or more 

individuals may face from the defendant's release. Drug trafficking represents a 

danger to the community and continued drug trafficking constitutes a danger to the 

community within the meaning of § 3l42(e). United States v. Wildjong, 2009 WL 

233766 (B.D. Mich., 2009). At least seven circuits, not including the Sixth 

Circuit, have so held. Id. The Sixth Circuit has not, however, reached a contrary 

viewpoint. 

Several factors in the present case indicate that defendant is involved in 

ongoing drug trafficking. First, the quantity of the drugs, over 1000 pounds of 

marijuana, which is worth over $1,000,000, suggests that someone who commits a 

crime on this order ofmagnitude has been previously involved in drug trafficking; 

in other words, a person does not begin a drug trafficking business by selling a 

million dollars in marijuana. A second factor is that the apparent delivery person 

Page 10 of 16 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 10 of 16 Pg ID 81
for the drugs (the person driving the Jeep and pulling the trailer) went to 

defendant's residence without defendant being present. This suggests a course or 

pattern ofpast conduct, given that a person would not make a delivery ofthis 

quantity of controlled substances without meeting with the person to whom the 

drugs were delivered, unless there was a familiarity with that person. 

The third factor suggesting continued drug trafficking is defendant's past 

conduct. While defendant has not been convicted of a drug offense, his past 

conduct, viewed in light of recent events, suggests related activities going back 

several years. In 2005, a package containing over 50 pounds ofmarijuana was 

sent to a post office box under defendant's control and it was addressed to 

defendant's business. Defendant has denied being involved in that incident, but 

considering the events from February of this year and the defendant's false denial 

of having any connection to the post office box to which the package was mailed, 

the facts support an inference of criminal involvement. The 2007 incident in 

which defendant was found on a train in New Mexico on a train sleeper car, that 

contained over $230,000 in cash, also supports an inference of criminal activity. 

While defendant claimed that he did not know anything about the presence of the 

money and claimed it belonged to someone else with whom he was traveling, no 

explanation was offered as to why anyone would be traveling with that much cash. 

Page 11 of 16 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 11 of 16 Pg ID 82
Further, defendant personally had $11,000 in cash, which was also 

unexplained. While there may be an innocent reason that someone would possess 

that much cash, large amounts of cash are commonly associated with drug 

trafficking or other criminal activity, where the individuals involved do not want 

to leave a "paper trail" associated with their activities. The 2008 incident where 

defendant was in a motor home in New Mexico with almost $48,000 in cash, while 

traveling with one of the individuals who was on the train with defendant the year 

before, also supports an inference of criminality. Defendant denied knowledge of 

this money as well, but no innocent explanation was offered as to why someone 

with defendant would have this much cash with them. Considered individually, 

these facts may not be particularly incriminating, but viewed together and also in 

light of the events of February of this year, they paint a fairly persuasive picture of 

continued drug trafficking on defendant's behalf. 

Another "danger to the community" factor is the presence of four handguns 

in defendant's residence, where the million dollar drug cache was found. 

Additionally, at the 1303 Sixth Street residence, where another 100 pounds of 

marijuana was found, two additional firearms were located. Drugs and guns are an 

extremely dangerous combination. Based on the above, it is determined that clear 

and convincing evidence exists, establishing that defendant represents a danger to 

Page 12 of 16 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 12 of 16 Pg ID 83
the community. 

With respect to defendant being a flight risk, he faces a statutory mandatory 

minimum sentence of ten years imprisonment if convicted of the offenses of which 

he is currently charged. The prospect of that potential sentence would provide a 

person an incentive to flee the jurisdiction, even if the person had family residing 

in this area. Additionally, the evidence indicates that defendant is involved in 

trafficking of extremely large quantities of controlled substances, which suggests 

access to large sums ofmoney and contact with individuals who operate at higher 

levels of criminal activity. Thus, defendant would have the means of fleeing and 

sustaining himself away from this area and outside the reach of law enforcement. 

Defendant also has displayed an ability and willingness to obtain and use false 

identification, which would certainly facilitate the avoidance of law enforcement. 

While defendant claimed to have obtained the false identification for a 

"fresh start" from his financial problems, his explanation does not make good 

sense under the circumstances. There would be no need to travel and stay in 

hotels under a false name for the purpose of a "fresh start," particularly six years 

after his 2001 arrest, which he claimed was the reason he needed a "fresh start." 

Defendant has provided false information to obtain bank accounts and to rent 

property. His willingness to use false information to accomplish some goal clearly 

Page 13 of 16 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 13 of 16 Pg ID 84
belies any claims oftruthfulness that he makes with respect to his promise to 

appear at future court proceedings and comply with the other normal conditions of 

bond that might be set. Inherent in a person's release on bond is an element of 

trust that the person will appear as required and comply with the terms ofbond. 

Such trust cannot be placed in a person who uses falsehoods and deception to 

accomplish his goals. 

Based on the above, and applying the standards contained in § 3 I42(g), the 

government's motion for detention is granted. Clear and convincing evidence 

indicates that defendant is a danger to the community based on his continued 

involvement in drug trafficking, his involvement in drug trafficking at a relatively 

high level, and his possession offirearms in conjunction with drug trafficking. A 

preponderance of the evidence indicates that defendant is a flight risk in light of 

the potential penalty he is facing and his regular use of a false identity to conduct 

some of his affairs. While defendant has family and friends who reside in the Flint 

area, even ifit could be argued that such support would rebut the presumption in 

favor of detention, the presumption remains as a factor weighing in favor of 

detention. Further, while defendant claims to be employed earning $4,000 per 

month, he has failed to produce documentation of that claim, even though he was 

given extra time to do so. Given the fact that defendant has a track record of 

Page 14 of 16 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 14 of 16 Pg ID 85
making false claims about his income, his claim about his current source of 

income is not given much weight in the absence of documentation or some other 

form of corroboration. 

Page 15 of 16 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 15 of 16 Pg ID 86
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I certify that on January 8, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing paper 

with the Clerk of the Court using the ECF system which will send notification of 

such filing to the following Craig F. Wininger, AUSA and Sheldon Halpern, and I 

certify that I have either hand delivered! mailed by United States Postal Service 

the paper to the following non-ECF participants: Pretrial Services Agency and 

U.S. Marshal's Service. 

sfJames P. Peltier 

Courtroom Deputy Clerk 

U.S. District Court 

600 Church Street 

Flint, MI 48502 

(810) 341-7850 

pete-peltier@mied.uscourts.gov 

Page 16 of 16 

4:09-cr-20105-LJM-MJH Doc # 19 Filed 03/20/09 Pg 16 of 16 Pg ID 87