Court filing
Criminal Complaint — U.S. v. Maurice… (Doc. 152, 1:20-cr-00228, record 278523)
Filed February 3, 2021 in United States v. Maurice Fayne related docket; one of 163 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2021-02-03 |
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia · No. 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL · Doc. 152 · 2021-02-03 · Docket on CourtListener
Full text
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
)
)
v.
)
CASE No.
)
1:20-CR-228-MHC-JKL
)
MAURICE FAYNE,
)
Defendant.
)
SUPPLEMENT TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
OF BOND (DOC. 129)
Defendant Maurice Fayne now files this supplement in support of his request
for this Court to reconsider the order of detention issued on December 22, 2020. In
support whereof, counsel shows the following:
Mr. Fayne was initially charged via complaint on May 12, 2020. Doc. 1.
He voluntarily appeared for arraignment with his retained attorney. Doc. 7. He
was granted a non-surety bond on May 13, 2020, subject to certain conditions.
Docs. 8, 9. Curfew and location monitoring conditions were removed from his
bond conditions on November 9, 2020. Doc. 95. He voluntarily appeared for
arraignment on his superseding indictment on December 17, 2020. Doc. 123. Mr.
Fayne remained on bond with no incidents or allegations of non-compliance until a
petition for revocation was filed with the Court of December 15, 2020. Doc. 120.
The petition alleged:
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 152 Filed 02/03/21 Page 1 of 7
2
On November 9, 2020, Jimia Cain a potential witness in the
investigation and or prosecution of Maurice Fayne received a text
from Fayne's number, 501-909-0875, telling her to dismiss her case
against Fayne. On the same day, Cain's attorney. Seth Rosenberg.
received
an
email
from
Fayne's
email
address,
arkansamo@gmail.com. The email advises Rosenberg to dismiss
Cain's case against Fayne or be sued for trespass.
Doc. 120 at 2. Mr. Fayne was arrested on the petition when he voluntarily
appeared for a check-in with his probation officer. The Court then held a hearing
on the motion to revoke Mr. Fayne’s bond on December 22, 2020, and Mr. Fayne
represented himself at the hearing. Doc. 125. The Court revoked Mr. Fayne’s
bond after finding that he had contacted a potential witness in this case and that no
conditions could be crafted to ensure he would not contact other witnesses. Doc.
145 at 35. Acting pro se, Mr. Fayne filed a motion for reconsideration of the
Court’s order. Doc. 129.
The Court has set a hearing on that motion for reconsideration for February
4, 2021. Doc. 129. After Mr. Fayne filed his motion for reconsideration, this
Court appointed present counsel to represent him.
Counsel is now filing the attached text messages between Mr. Fayne and
Ms. Cain to supplement Mr. Fayne’s motion. (See attached text messages.) It
appears that the texts filed by the government are not the full extent of the text
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 152 Filed 02/03/21 Page 2 of 7
3
chain and it appears that Ms. Cain contacted Mr. Fayne first on November 9th1.
Counsel also asserts that, even though Mr. Fayne was instructed not to have
contact with victims or witnesses in this case, there is some ambiguity in the
instructions Mr. Fayne received from probation. In light of these facts and in light
of the fact that Mr. Fayne has now spent 44 days in custody as a result of this
violation, he asks this Court to reconsider its previous detention order.
ARGUMENT
Under 18 U.S.C. §3148, a judicial officer shall enter an order of revocation
and detention if, after a hearing, the judicial officer—
(1)
finds that there is—
(A)
probable cause to believe that the person has committed a
Federal, State, or local crime while on release; or
(B) clear and convincing evidence that the person has violated any
other condition of release; and
(2)
finds that—
(A)
based on the factors set forth in section 3142(g) of this title [18
USCS § 3142(g)], there is no condition or combination of
conditions of release that will assure that the person will not
flee or pose a danger to the safety of any other person or the
community; or
1
Counsel asked counsel for the government for any text messages that were
allegedly sent the week of November 2nd (as stated at the bond revocation hearing),
but it appears that Ms. Cain did not produce any other messages than those that
were presented at the hearing. It also appears that neither the text messages saved
in Mr. Fayne’s phone nor those produced by Ms. Cain contain a complete list of all
messages sent between the two.
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 152 Filed 02/03/21 Page 3 of 7
4
(B)
the person is unlikely to abide by any condition or combination
of conditions of release.
The history of this case supports Mr. Fayne’s claim that he is likely to abide
by this Court’s conditions. And the conditions that were in place prior to the
revocation can assure he will not flee and can ensure the safety of other persons
and the community. There is no allegation that Mr. Fayne ever contacted any other
victim or witness other than Ms. Cain or that he did anything else inappropriate
while on bond. He was clearly abiding by this Court’s conditions from May 13,
2020 through November 9. 2020. His conditions of release were even loosened to
remove the curfew and location monitoring conditions in November 2020. He was
clearly attempting to follow all of the Court’s rules.
Mr. Fayne admits that he did have contact with witness Jimia Cain on
November 9, 2020. He understands that he should not have done so, but he does
want the Court to understand what led him to that error in judgment. He points out
that although the Court notified him orally at the bond hearing that he should not
be in contact with any victims or witnesses, the written bond conditions did not
contain the names of any victims or witnesses. Doc. 9 at 2. Further, the list that
Mr. Fayne later received from his probation officer included only the following
names:
UCB Bank Victims
Sharon Thompson
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 152 Filed 02/03/21 Page 4 of 7
5
Greg Snell
Jay Rajee
Michael Sargent
Daniel Jay
Jamaal Shepard
Cornelius Hood
Cawanza Wilkins
Tyrice Vaughan
Carrie Capote
(See attached text message.) Mr. Fayne should not have engaged with Ms. Cain on
November 9, but it was his belief that he was responding to her about a lawsuit she
had filed against him in Washington state and about the current threats she was
making to work with law enforcement related to her claims against him – not about
the current federal case here. He asserts that he was in no way attempting to
influence her actions in this case because he did not know she was involved in this
case2.
Given the ambiguity in the list of people he was not permitted to contact,
and the fact that Mr. Fayne has made no effort to contact any other witness or
victims in the case, he asserts that there are conditions that can be crafted to ensure
that he complies with all bond conditions in the future. He has now spent 44 days
in custody in this violation, which will definitely serve as a deterrent against any
future bond violations. Should the Court determine that additional conditions are
2
Counsel asserts that it was completely appropriate for Mr. Fayne to contact
Ms. Cain’s attorney regarding the Washington civil case because he is not
represented by an attorney in that case.
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 152 Filed 02/03/21 Page 5 of 7
6
necessary, Mr. Fayne will abide by those conditions. Additional conditions could
include home detention, change of phone number for Mr. Fayne, blocking any
numbers that may be associated with Ms. Cain or other witnesses, requiring that
Mr. Fayne to use only one phone and regularly producing that that phone to be
searched by his probation officer for improper conduct.
Mr. Fayne is now represented by counsel that can address any questions he
may have and who can also reach out to government counsel and/or witness’
attorneys to conduct any witness interviews that may be necessary in preparation
for trial. Finally, due to his history of Asthma and use of an inhaler, Mr. Fayne is
at a higher risk for complications due to Covid-19. Mr. Fayne has been issued an
inhaler at the detention center and he is concerned for his health3. Should he be
permitted to bond, he could remain in his residence (like the rest of us) until he can
receive a vaccine. Should he need medical care, he could receive that care outside
of the facility at his own expense, rather than requiring tax payers to fit the bill for
it. For all of these reasons, Mr. Fayne asks this Court to grant his request to
reconsider his order of detention.
Respectfully submitted this 3rd day of February 2021.
s/Saraliene S. Durrett
SARALIENE S. DURRETT
3
Counsel has submitted a release for his medical information to the facility,
but the records have not yet been provided.
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 152 Filed 02/03/21 Page 6 of 7
7
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that the undersigned has this date electronically filed the
foregoing supplement with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which
will automatically send email notification of such filing to the following
attorney(s) of record:
All Defense Counsel
All AUSAs of record
Respectfully submitted this 3rd day of February 2021.
s/Saraliene S. Durrett
SARALIENE S. DURRETT
1800 Peachtree Street
Suite 300
Atlanta, GA 30309
(404) 433-0855
ssd@defendingatl.com
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 152 Filed 02/03/21 Page 7 of 7File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.gand.278523.152.0.pdf
- Size
- 138,815 bytes
- SHA-256
- 72934d6f47810f0c35b52474f67776d18a5be6bf22b0ff426b891cbc5f5a74b4
- Original
- PACER (login required)