Court filing
Order denying 147 Motion for Reconsideration as to Carl Delano Torjagbo (1) — USA v. Torjagbo (Dkt. 152, N.D. Ga. No. 1:22-cr-00171)
Filed January 8, 2025 in USA v. Torjagbo; one of 189 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2025-01-08 |
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia · No. 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC · Doc. 152 · 2025-01-08 · Docket on CourtListener
Full text
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION United States of America, v. Carl Delano Torjagbo, Defendant. ________________________________/ Case No. 1:22-cr-171-MLB ORDER Defendant Carl Torjagbo asks this Court to reconsider its order denying his appeal of the Magistrate Judge’s detention order on the grounds that the State Department has invalidated a passport Defendant previously claimed he could not locate. (Dkt. 147.) Defendant contends the “lack of a valid passport diminishes any concern the [Defendant] presents a flight risk.” (Dkt. 147 at 3.) The Court rejects Defendant’s contention and denies Defendant’s motion. The Court previously explained that: no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of Defendant at trial. He faces significant charges that could result in significant jail time. The United States has substantial evidence of his involvement in the charged offenses. Defendant has no ties Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC Document 152 Filed 01/08/25 Page 1 of 2 2 here and significant ties outside the United States. He has no property tying him to the United States and could present no family or friends who might be willing to post a surety so as to assure his appearance. Defendant clearly has plenty of motive to flee the United States (possible incarceration here and family and money overseas) as well as the manner and means of doing so (money and a passport). (Dkt. 63 at 11.) While the invalidation of the passport might impact one fact the Court considered, the Court stands by its analysis of the remaining (uncontested) facts. For the reasons stated, the Court DENIES Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration (Dkt. 147). SO ORDERED this 8th day of January, 2025. 1 (1 1 (1 M I C H " K E L L . B R O W N Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC Document 152 Filed 01/08/25 Page 2 of 2
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.gand.303267.152.0.pdf
- Size
- 107,789 bytes
- SHA-256
- 8065ccd9ce162c00c97c43f1572b6f03c2ebb3b0b4e3e4ef01ac892d5b1d6850
- Original
- PACER (login required)