UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States

v. Criminal No. 07-cr-22-01-JD

Brandon Prewara

O R D E R

On November 1, 2010, defendant appeared for a Aprobable 

cause@ hearing under Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.1 on two alleged 

violations of conditions of supervision. Defendant stipulated 

to probable cause on the violations. I therefore find probable 

cause that defendant has violated the conditions as charged in

the petition. 

Defendant sought bail conditions under Rule 32.1(a)(6). The 

government sought detention. Under Rule 32.1(a)(6), defendant 

bears the burden of establishing by clear and convincing 

evidence that he will not flee and that he poses no danger to 

any other person or to the community. Based on the evidence 

presented at today's hearing, and for the reasons stated on the 

record, defendant has failed to meet his burden of persuading 

the court that he poses no danger to himself or to the 

community. 

Case 1:07-cr-00022-JD Document 67 Filed 11/05/10 Page 1 of 3
2

The court stated on the record its reasons for detaining 

defendant. Those reasons are summarized below:

Since the inception of his supervision, which 

commenced on March 4, 2009, defendant has engaged in 

two separate episodes of alcohol-related, dangerous 

driving. The first (October 20, 2009) resulted in a 

serious car accident and the hospitalization of one 

person. The second (October 22, 2010) involved 

defendant leading police on a high speed chase, with 

defendant traveling speeds in excess of 75 mph. 

Despite the evidence that defendant was under the 

influence of alcohol on both dates, defendant has 

maintained, when discussing his behavior with his 

probation officer, that he does not have an alcohol 

problem. 

Defendant's dangerous conduct, coupled with his denial 

that he has an alcohol problem, represents a grave 

risk to public safety. The court has considered less 

restrictive alternatives to detention, but defendant 

failed to meet his burden of persuading the court by 

clear and convincing evidence that he would abide by 

lesser restrictions.

Case 1:07-cr-00022-JD Document 67 Filed 11/05/10 Page 2 of 3
3

The court finds that there are no conditions or combination 

of conditions that are likely to assure the safety of the 

defendant and the community. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that 

the defendant be detained pending a final revocation hearing. 

The defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney 

General or his designated representative for confinement in a 

corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, from 

persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody 

pending appeal. The defendant shall 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 of the 

corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to the United 

States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection 

with a court proceeding. 

SO ORDERED.

 

Landya B. McCafferty

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: November 5, 2010

 

cc: James P. O'Rourke, Jr., Esq.

Robert J. Veiga, Esq.

U.S. Marshal

U.S. Probation

Case 1:07-cr-00022-JD Document 67 Filed 11/05/10 Page 3 of 3