Page 1 of 4 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

 v. No. 

ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL 

In accordance with the Bail Reform Act of 1984,18 U.S.C. § 3141 et seq., a detention hearing was held in this case 

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f) to determine whether there are conditions of release that will reasonably assure the 

appearance of the defendant as required and/or the safety of any other person and the community. This order is a 

summary of the Court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law stated more fully on the record during that hearing.

In the event that the defendant seeks review of this order of detention, the defendant must provide a 

transcript of the Court’s oral ruling to the reviewing court along with this order.

PART I -- FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 

A. Rebuttable Presumption Under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e) (Previous violator): The Court finds that there is a 

rebuttable presumption that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the safety of any 

other person and the community. This presumption exists because the following conditions are met: 

(1) the defendant is charged in a case that involves: 

(a) a crime of violence, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591, or an offense listed in 18 U.S.C. § 

2332b(g)(5)(B) for which a maximum term of imprisonment of 10 years or more is prescribed; 

(b) an offense for which the maximum sentence is life imprisonment or death; 

(c) an offense for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed in the 

Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq., the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act 

(21 U.S.C. § 951 et seq.), or chapter 705 of title 46; or 

(d) any felony if the person has been convicted of two or more offenses described in paragraphs 

(1)(a)-(c) above, or two or more state or local offenses that would have been offenses described in 

paragraphs (1)(a)-(c) if federal jurisdiction had existed, or a combination thereof; and 

(2) the defendant has been convicted of a Federal offense that is described in subparagraph c paragraph 

(1)(a) above, or of a State or local offense that would have been such an offense if a circumstances 

giving rise to Federal jurisdiction had existed; or 

(3) the offense described in subparagraph (1)(a) above for which the defendant has been convicted was 

committed while the defendant was on release pending trial for a Federal, State, or local offense; and 

(4) a period of not more than five years has elapsed since the date of conviction, or the release of the 

defendant from imprisonment, for the offense described in subparagraph (1)(a) above, whichever is 

 later. 
Page 2 of 4 

B. Rebuttable Presumption Under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e) (Narcotics, firearm, other offenses): The Court finds 

that there is a rebuttable presumption that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the 

appearance of the defendant as required and the safety of the community because there is probable cause to 

believe that the defendant committed one or more of the following offenses: 

 (1) an offense for which a maximum term of imprisonment of 10 years or more is prescribed in the 

 Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.), the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act 

 (21 U.S.C. § 951 et seq.), or chapter 705 of title 46; 

 (2) an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), 956(a), or 2332(b); 

 (3) an offense listed in 18 U.S.C. § 2332b(g)(5) for which a maximum term of imprisonment of 10 years or 

 more is prescribed; or 

 (4) an offense involving a minor victim under 18 U.S.C. 1201, 1591, 2241, 2242, 2244(a)(1), 2245, 2251, 

 2251A, 2252(a)(1), 2252(a)(2), 2252(a)(3), 2252A(a)(1), 2252A(a)(2), 2252A(a)(3), 2252A(a)(4), 2260, 

 2421, 2422, 2423, or 2425 of Title 18. 

The defendant has not rebutted the presumption. 

 The defendant has rebutted the presumption. 

C. Section 3142(g) Analysis: The Court considered the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g): (1) the nature 

and circumstances of the offense charged; (2) the weight of the evidence of the offense charged; (3) the history 

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

community that would be posed by the defendant’s release. Based upon the information presented and the 

factors considered, the Court has determined that the defendant must be detained pending trial because: 

The government has proved by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is a danger to the 

community and that no condition or combination of conditions of release would reasonably assure the 

safety of the community. 

The government has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that there is a serious risk that the 

defendant would flee if released pending trial and that no condition or combination of conditions of release 

would reasonably assure the defendant's appearance as required. 

The Court provided its analysis of the Section 3142(g) factors and detailed findings in open court at the conclusion 

of the detention hearing. The reasons for detention include, without limitation, the following: 

Lack of stable employment 

Prior criminal history 

Lack of significant community or family ties in the Northern District of Illinois 

Existence of significant family or other ties outside the United States 

History of alcohol or substance abuse 

Prior failure to appear in court as ordered 

Prior attempt(s) to evade law enforcement 

Facing lengthy period of incarceration if convicted 

Facing deportation after serving any period of incarceration 

Past use of alias names 

 
Page 3 of 4 

Weight of evidence against the defendant is strong 

History of violence or use of weapons 

Engaged in criminal activity while on probation, parole, or supervision 

OTHER REASONS OR FURTHER EXPLANATION: 

PART II -- DIRECTIONS REGARDING DETENTION

The defendant is remanded to the custody of the United States Marshal or his/her 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. 
Page 4 of 4 

PART III -- APPEALS AND THIRD PARTY RELEASE 

 IT IS ORDERED that should the defendant appeal this detention order, it is counsel's responsibility to deliver a 

copy of the motion for review/reconsideration to Pretrial Services at least one day prior to the hearing set before the 

District Court. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if the defendant seeks to be released to a third party, it is counsel's 

responsibility to notify Pretrial Services sufficiently in advance of the hearing before the District Court to allow 

Pretrial Services an opportunity to interview and investigate the potential third party custodian. 

DATE: 

United States Magistrate Judge