Second Application for Review/Reconsideration — USA v. Ayvazyan et al. (Dkt. 355, C.D. Cal.)

Summary

Arman Hayrapetyan's notice of motion and motion for second review or reconsideration of the order setting conditions of release or detention, filed May 20, 2021 as Document 355 in Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, asks the Court to grant a proposed bond package. The motion, from counsel Jilbert Tahmazian of Tahmazian Law Firm P.C., offers a third-party surety, Ashot Samsonian, on a $75,000 appearance bond to be replaced by property owned by Mr. Samsonian's wife in the amount of $50,000 with justification, cites a broker's opinion of the property's market value of $542,480.00, and asks for oral argument.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW     Document 355     Filed 05/20/21     Page 1 of 4   Page ID
oO “TN

\o

JILBERT TAHMAZIAN; 143574
TAHMAZIAN LAW FIRM P.C.
1518 West Glenoaks Blvd.,
Glendale, CA 91201

Telephone: (818) 242-8201
Facsimile: (818) 242-8246
Attorneys for Defendant,
ARMAN HAYRAPETYAN

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

VS.
ARMAN HAYRAPETYAN,
DEFENDANT,

Page 1of4 Page ID

UNITED STATES DISCTRICT COURT
CENTERAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CASE NO.: CR 20-579(A)-SVW-6

NOTICE OF MOTION AND
MOTION FOR SECOND
REVIEW/RECONSIDERATION OF
ORDER SETTING CONDITIONS OF
RELEASE/DETENTION

H

H

H

H

HM

Defendant, Arman Hayrapetyan, by and through the undersigned Counsel of record, hereby

submits the following memorandum in support of reconsideration of detention.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW     Document 355     Filed 05/20/21     Page 2 of 4   Page ID
oOo S&S NS DH

I. INTRODUCTION

Defendant Arman Hayrapetyan (hereafter referred to as “Hayrapetyan”) submits the following
brief of the Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Defendant’s Second Application for Review
of Order setting release or detention. For the reasons set forth below, all previous applications and
exhibits contained therein, defendant’s motion should be granted.

Il. LEGAL STANDARD

The Bail Reform Act provides that a defendant shall be detained only if a judicial officer finds
that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the
defendant as required for the safety of any other person and the community. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e).
Title 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g) “specifies the various factors to determine whether the court may impose
conditions of release that will reasonably assure the appearance of the person.” United States v.
Keeton (E.D.Cal. 2020) 457 F. Supp. 3d 855, 858.) These factors are (1) “the nature and
circumstances of the offense charged;” (2) “the weight of the evidence against the person;” (3) “‘the
history and characteristics of the person” including, among other factors, family ties, employment,
financial resources, length of residence in the community, community ties, past conduct, history
relating to drug or alcohol abuse, criminal history, and record concerning appearance at court
proceedings; and (4) “the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or the community that
would be posed by the person’s release.” 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g). The “weight of the evidence has the
least force in the court's analysis, in recognition of the presumption of innocence that attaches to
defendant at the pretrial stage of a criminal proceeding.” United States v. Keeton (E.D.Cal. 2020)

457 F. Supp. 3d 855, 859 (citing Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 533 (1979).
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW     Document 355     Filed 05/20/21     Page 3 of 4   Page ID
Ill. DISCUSSION

A. DEFENDANT’S DETENTION IS NOT APPROPRIATE: HE IS NEITHER A
FLIGHT RISK NOR A DANGER TO THE COMMUNITY

a. DEFENDANT IS NOT A DANGER TO THE COMMUNITY

As discussed in Hayrapetyan’s previous application for review, he neither the primary
beneficiary, nor the architect of this scheme, therefore his degree of danger to the community is far
lower than most, if not all, of his co-defendants. As previously noted, the Pre-Trial report prepared
by Probation Officer Dalayna Ecklund, states that “although the instant allegations are concerning,
as they involve a large loss amount and an economic danger to the community, the defendant has no
criminal history. Furthermore, the defendant does not have any substance abuse issues or mental
health history. Therefore, Pretrial Services believes conditions could be imposed to mitigate the risk
of danger to the community.” (PSR, pg. 5) Mr. Hayrapetyan is entirely willing to abide by any
conditions suggested by Pretrial Services to abate any concern about his potential danger to the
public.

As such, given the Government finds the release of all other Defendant’s harmless, they
should find the same for Mr. Hayrapetyan.

b. DEFENDANT IS NOT A FLIGHT RISK

In Hayrapetyan’s first application for bail reconsideration, he agreed to sign an unsecured
appearance bond ranging from $50,000 to $75,000. In addition, he offered to have a third party
surety—Ashot Samsonian—sign an appearance bond on Mr. Hayrapetyan’s behalf roughly in the

amount of $75,000. Now, Mr. Hayrapetyan is able to have the same third party surety sign an
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW     Document 355     Filed 05/20/21     Page 4 of 4   Page ID
oO “TO DN

\o

appearance bond without justification in the amount of $75,000, to be replaced by property owned
by Mr. Samsonian’s wife in the amount of $50,000 with justification.

The property offered—see Exhibit A—is a residential home located at 67110 Garbino Rd.,
Cathedral City, CA 92234. Attached as [Exhibit B] is a broker’s letter from Alfred Bandari stating
that “based on comparable sales of the subject property, defined scope or work, statement of
assumptions, and limiting conditions, and appraiser’s certification, [his] opinion of the market
value, as defined, of the real property that is the subject of this report is $542,480.00.” [Exhibit B]
Such an offering would mirror many of the co-defendant’s bond conditions’, and given their release
was approved, it would only be appropriate that Mr. Hayrapetyan’s is also approved. It is our belief
that the affidavit with justification for $100,000 with full deeding of property should be sufficient.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, Arman Hayrapetyan, respectfully requests that this Honorable Court
grant the proposed bond package. The defense also respectfully ask that the Court grant oral

briefing/arguments for the reconsideration of the bond.

Dated: May 20", 2021 Respectfully Submitted

BY:

eat 1, AHMAZIAN,

Attorney for Defendant

"See Tamara Dadyan, Manuk Grigoryan, Edvard Paronyan etc.

z4z


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.cacd.813904.355.0.pdf

Size

216,092 bytes

SHA-256

1608920437727b4551ae1469e421bd412bc0e6920c8031ef72882591c5098fd3

Our copy

gov.uscourts.cacd.813904.355.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)