Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings Makiah Miles case — U.S. District Court, E.D. Cal. Detention Order — United States v. Miles (Dkt. 13, E.D. Cal.)

Court filing

Detention Order — United States v. Miles (Dkt. 13, E.D. Cal.)

Summary

A detention order in United States v. Makiah Miles, No. 22 CR 000129 DAD BAM, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, dated and filed May 27, 2022 as Document 13. After a detention hearing under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), the court orders the defendant detained, finding by a preponderance of the evidence that no conditions will reasonably assure the defendant's appearance. The checked findings describe the charged crime, Conspiracy to Commit Mail Fraud, as serious with a maximum penalty of 20 years and the weight of the evidence as high. They also list no known family ties in the area, no steady employment or substantial financial resources, a significant prior criminal record, and that the defendant is serving a state offense and is alleged to have committed the offense while in state custody.

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

Filed May 27, 2022 in Makiah Miles; one of 1 filings from this case.

Record facts

CourtU.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
Filed2022-05-27

Cite this document

“Detention Order — United States v. Miles (Dkt. 13, E.D. Cal.).” U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, No. 1:22-cr-00129, Doc. 13, filed 2022-05-27. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/court-filings/full-docket-makiah-miles-caed-410589/2022-05-27-gov-uscourts-caed-410589-13-0-doc-13/, SHA-256 2ba135cb9d2db163e926f4ee2a193a1ba5cfded42c1bac9a26ae095c2e29cf32.

Full text

UNITED STATES
             Case 1:22-cr-00129-DAD-BAM      DISTRICT
                                         Document     COURT
                                                  13 Filed 05/27/22 Page 1 of 2
                                   EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                                      No. 22 CR 000129 DAD BAM

                          Plaintiff,

        v.                                                     DETENTION ORDER

MAKIAH MILES,

                       Defendant.

A. Order For Detention
   After conducting a detention hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f) of the Bail Reform Act, the Court orders the
   above-named defendant detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e) and (i).

B. Statement Of Reasons For The Detention
   The Court orders the defendant’s detention because it finds:
   X    By a preponderance of the evidence that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably
        assure the appearance of the defendant as required.
        By clear and convincing evidence that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably
        assure the safety of any other person and the community.

C. Findings of Fact
   The Court’s findings are based on the evidence which was presented in Court and that which was contained in the
   Pretrial Services Report, and includes the following:
   X    (1) Nature and Circumstances of the offense charged:
          X    (a) The crime, Conspiracy to Commit Mail Fraud, is a serious crime and carries a maximum penalty of
               20 years
               (b) The offense is a crime of violence.
               (c) The offense involves a narcotic drug.
               (d) The offense involves a large amount of controlled substances.
   X    (2) The weight of the evidence against the defendant is high.
   X    (3) The history and characteristics of the defendant including:
               (a) General Factors:
                        The defendant appears to have a mental condition which may affect whether the
                        defendant will appear.
                   X    The defendant has no known family ties in the area.
                   X    The defendant has no known steady employment.
                   X    The defendant has no known substantial financial resources.
                   X    The defendant is not a long time resident of the community.
                        The defendant does not have any known significant community ties.
                   X    Past conduct of the defendant :serving state offense; alleged to have committed offense while in
                        state custody
                        The defendant has a history relating to drug abuse.
                        The defendant has a history relating to alcohol abuse.
                   X    The defendant has a significant prior criminal record.
                        The defendant has a prior record of failure to appear at court proceedings.
                        The defendant has a history of violating probation and/or parole.



                                                           1

Defendant: MAKIAH MILES                                                     Page 2 or 2
           Case 1:22-cr-00129-DAD-BAM Document 13 Filed 05/27/22 Page 2 of 2
Case Number: 22 CR 000129 DAD BAM

            (b) Whether the defendant was on probation, parole, or release by a court;
                        At the time of the current arrest, the defendant was on:
                               Probation
                               Parole
                               Release pending trial, sentence, appeal or completion of sentence.
             (c) Other Factors:
                               The defendant is an illegal alien and is subject to deportation.
                               The defendant is a legal alien and will be subject to deportation if convicted.
                         X     Other: The defendant is a sentenced state prisoner.
         (4) The nature and seriousness of the danger posed by the defendant’s release are as follows:
         (5) Rebuttable Presumptions
             In determining that the defendant should be detained, the court also relied on the following
             rebuttable presumption(s) contained in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e), which the court finds the
             defendant has not rebutted:
                    a.         The crime charged is one described in § 3142(f)(1).
                               (A) a crime of violence; or
                               (B) an offense for which the maximum penalty is life imprisonment or death; or
                               (C) a controlled substance violation that has a maximum penalty of ten years or
                               more; or
                               (D) A felony after the defendant had been convicted of two or more prior offenses
                               described in (A) through (C) above, and the defendant has a prior conviction of one of the
                               crimes mentioned in (A) through (C) above which is less than five years old and which
                               was committed while the defendant was on pretrial release
                    b. There is probable cause to believe that defendant committed 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.,
                               the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act, 46 U.S.C. App. §§ 1901, et seq., or
                               an offense under 18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c), 956(a), or 2332b.
                               an offense involving a minor 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.

D.       Additional Directives
         Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(i)(2)-(4), the Court directs that:

        The defendant be committed to the custody of the Attorney General 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 be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with counsel; and

        That, 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 in which the defendant is confined deliver the defendant to a United States Marshal for
the purpose of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:      May 27, 2022
                                                        UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


                                                              2

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.caed.410589.13.0.pdf
Size
117,146 bytes
SHA-256
2ba135cb9d2db163e926f4ee2a193a1ba5cfded42c1bac9a26ae095c2e29cf32
Our copy
gov.uscourts.caed.410589.13.0.pdf
Original
archive.org
Back to top