# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 21

- 40335 Summary Calendar

**United States of America,** Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus **Keith Todd Ashley,** Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas No. 4:20

- CR

- 318

- 1

Before **King, Smith,** and **Wilson,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** * Keith Ashley appeals an order of detention pending his trial for wire fraud, mail fraud, and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of vio

lence. The district court found that Ashley had failed to rebut the presump

tion against release and that th ere is no condition or combination of condi

-

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5, the court has determined that this opin

ion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 14, 2021 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-40335 Document: 00515898635 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/14/2021No. 21

- 40335

2 tions on which he could be released . Ashley contends that he is not a flight risk or danger to the community ; he posits a list of conditions he avers would reasonably assure the public’s safety upon his release. In addition, he asserts that the district court abused its discretion by not conducting a fresh deten

tion hearing after he was charged with the firearm offense in a superseding indictment, which gave rise to a presumption against release. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(3)(B)

. In his reply to the g overnment’s response to his motion, Ashley maintains that he is entitled to pretrial release in light of new informa

tion regarding the g overnment ’s agreement to let his state murder prosecu

tion proceed first and in view of the likelihood of his being granted bail in state
court

. The district court’s finding on dangerousness is supported by the rec

ord evidence that Ashley murdered one of his financial clients to benefit from his life insurance policy; that he took out significant policies on himself, his wife, and his children; that he stole $225,000 from his mother

- in

- law; and that he wrote a lengthy suicide note on his cell phone. See United States v. Rueben , 974 F.2d 580, 586 (5th Cir. 1992) . Ashley’s argument on appeal regarding the risk that he would obstruct justice or tamper with wit nesses is unresponsive to the district court’s findings. In any event , Ashley fails to show that the district court abused its discretion in finding that he poses a danger to the community

. See id . In addition, he show s no error in the district court’s determination that no conditions of pretrial release would reasonably assure the public’s safety. See id

. ; see also § 3142(e)

− (g).
Moreover , the district court did not err by not conducting a de novo detention hearing before adopting the magistrate judge’s detention order. See United States v. Hensler , No. 94

- 50042, 1994 WL 83436, at * 2 (5th Cir. Feb. 24, 1994) (unpublished but precedential per **5th Cir. R. 47.5.3** ). Lastly, insofar as Ashley seeks release on account of the g overnment’s prose

cu tion agreement with Texas, we do not consider evidence or facts that were Case: 21-40335 Document: 00515898635 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/14/2021No. 21

- 40335

3 not before the district court at the time of the challenged ruling. See Theriot v. Par ish of Jefferson , 185 F.3d 477, 491 n.26 (5th Cir. 1999).

The order of detention pending trial is **AFFIRMED**

. Case: 21-40335 Document: 00515898635 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/14/2021