Memorandum of Law Supporting Pretrial Release — United States v. Daniel Dadoun (D.N.J.)

Record facts

U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey · No. 3:25-cr-00215-RK · Doc. 18 · 2024-09-18 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

1
ANTHONY POPE LAW, P.C. 
 
ATTORNEYS AT LAW 
 
NEW JERSEY OFFICE 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                           NEW YORK OFFICE 
60 PARK PLACE 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
            275 MADISON AVE. 
SUITE 1101 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
          35TH FLOOR 
NEWARK, NJ 07102 
 
 
 
 
 
           
                       NEW YORK, NY 10016 
                
TEL: (973) 344-4406 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
        PLEASE REPLY TO: 
FAX: (973) 344-3201 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
            New Jersey Office  
www.anthonypopelawfirm.com 
 
 
 
 
 
 
               
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANTHONY POPE, ESQ.* 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
               apope@apopefirm.com     
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
*Certified by the Supreme Court of  
 
 
 
 
 
         
New Jersey as a Civil & Criminal Trial Attorney    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
September 18, 2024 
VIA ECF  
The Honorable Jessica S. Allen  
United States Magistrate Judge 
United States District Court  
District of New Jersey 
50 Walnut Street 
Newark, NJ 07102 
 
Re:  
United States v. Daniel Dadoun   
                            Case No. 23-mj-08137 
 
Dear Judge Allen,  
 
Defendant Daniel Dadoun submits this Memorandum of Law in support of his 
application for pre-trial release on conditions pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142. It is 
respectfully submitted that Mr. Dadoun does not pose an actual risk of flight, is not a 
danger to the community, and that there are conditions of release which will assure 
his full compliance with this Court’s directives to appear and to answer the charges 
against him. Mr. Dadoun’s character, generosity, and charitable spirit, demonstrated 
herein and by the attached character letters, only serve to highlight the lack of 
danger he poses and the absence of any risk of flight in this case. Therefore, in 
accordance with the recommendation of United States Pretrial Services, we ask for 
Mr. Dadoun’s pre-trial release under any conditions the Court deems suitable, 
secured by co-signer and proposed third-party custodian, Moti Zilber, as well as 
three of the defendant’s unencumbered properties.  
  
1. Applicable Law 
 
Mr. Dadoun comes before this Court presumptively innocent and carries his 
burden of production to establish that he should be released on bail. The Bail Reform 
Act requires the release of a defendant on the “least restrictive” conditions necessary 
to “reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required and the safety of any 
Case 3:25-cr-00215-RK     Document 18     Filed 09/19/24     Page 1 of 6 PageID: 46

 
2
other person and the community.” See 18 U.S.C.  § 3142(g). To that end, a court 
“shall order the pretrial release of a person on personal recognizance, or upon the 
execution of an unsecured appearance bond in an amount specified by the court, … 
unless the judicial officer determines that such release will not reasonably assure the 
appearance of the person as required or will endanger the safety of any other person 
or the community.” 18 U.S.C.  § 3142(b) (emphasis added). Both the Bail Reform Act 
and case law make clear that it is only a limited group of offenders who should be 
denied bail pending trial. 
 
Mr. Dadoun was charged by criminal complaint with bank fraud in violation of 
18 U.S.C. § 1344 and transacting in criminal proceeds, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 
1957 (ECF Document #1). Neither charge carries a presumption of detention. Even if 
the Court were to apply the presumption, it is rebuttable and a defendant bears only 
a limited burden of production – not a burden of persuasion – to rebut that 
presumption by coming forward with evidence that he does not pose a danger to the 
community or a risk of flight. United States v. Perry, 788 F.2d 100, 114-15 (3d Cir. 
1986). And, notwithstanding the presumption, the Government is still required to 
establish that no assortment of bail conditions will assure the defendant’s presence 
and the safety of others. See 18 U.S.C.  § 3142(e)-(f). Thus, it is respectfully submit 
that, after an analysis of each of the statutory factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g), 
Mr. Dadoun will be able to satisfy his “limited burden of production” and the 
Government will be unable to satisfy any prong of its burden of persuasion, namely, 
that he presents a danger to the community or risk of flight that no assortment of 
bail conditions cannot eliminate. 
Detaining Mr. Dadoun unnecessarily will also unjustly impair his ability to 
defend himself. When an individual is in custody, the Bail Reform Act “permit[s] the 
temporary release of the person, in the custody of a United States marshal or another 
appropriate person, to the extent that the judicial officer determines such release to 
be necessary for preparation of the person’s defense or for another compelling 
reason.” 18 U.S.C. § 3142(i). Moreover, the Bail Reform Act “permit[s] the temporary 
release of the person, in the custody of a United States marshal or another 
appropriate person, to the extent that the judicial officer determines such release to 
be necessary for preparation of the person’s defense or for another compelling 
reason.” 18 U.S.C. § 3142(i). “Pretrial detention can have a devastating effect on 
defendants’ ability to prepare for trial.”1 Communication between lawyer and client is 
much more limited when the client is detained. Those detained pretrial have a lower 
likelihood of obtaining an acquittal than those who remain at liberty before trial to 
assist with their defense. Id. at 22-23.  
 
 
1 See United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, “Handbook on Strategies to Reduce 
Overcrowding in Prisons” at 22-23 (October 2013), available at: 
https://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-
reform/Overcrowding_in_prisons_Ebook.pdf (hereinafter “Overcrowding in Prisons”) 
(citing various studies).  
 
Case 3:25-cr-00215-RK     Document 18     Filed 09/19/24     Page 2 of 6 PageID: 47

 
3
Even though the Bail Reform Act of 1984, 18 U.S.C. 3141-3150, may have 
expanded the circumstances in which pretrial detention is applicable, pretrial 
detention is still the exception and not the rule. Pretrial detention is appropriate "only 
for a 'limited group' of offenders ..., i.e., the 'small but identifiable group of 
particularly dangerous defendants as to whom neither the imposition of stringent 
release conditions nor the prospect of revocation of release can reasonably assure the 
safety of the community or other persons.'" United States v. Traitz, 807 F.2d 
322, 325 (3d Cir.1986) (quoting S.Rep. No. 98-225, 98th Cong., 2d Sess. 6-
7, reprinted in 1984 U.S. Code Cong. & Admin.News 3182, 3189). “[T]he 
dangerousness determination involves a prediction of the detainee’s likely future 
behavior. Such a prediction explores not the external world of past events but the 
inner territory of the detainee’s intentions.” United States v. Perry, 788 F.2d 100, 114 
(3d Cir. 1986). 
 
2. Mr. Dadoun is not a Danger to the Community or a Flight Risk 
 
Daniel Dadoun was born into a Jewish family to mother Esther Marelly and 
father David Dadoun in Morocco. His childhood was tumultuous, lacking safety and 
security. His father was extremely abusive to Daniel, his siblings, and his mother.  
Neighbors and friends recall often seeing members of the family walking around with 
injuries and bruises. Sadly, a history of abuse extended up both sides of Daniel’s 
family tree. Daniel’s maternal grandfather was extremely abusive to his family, and 
Daniel’s maternal grandmother escaped the abuse by fleeing and leaving Daniel’s 
mother behind. The abuse and abandonment Daniel’s mother endured left her with 
deep psychological wounds. Rather than healing from the trauma, she repeated the 
dynamic by marrying an abusive man—Daniel’s father. Daniel’s mother eventually 
fled her abuse as well, abandoning Daniel who was left with his abusive father.  
 
When Daniel was five years old, his father was arrested. Antisemitism was 
rampant and pervasive in the Morocco of Daniel’s youth, and, being Jewish, Daniel’s 
father was targeted with false accusations of selling expired drugs which led to his 
incarceration. This was an extremely traumatic time for Daniel and his siblings. A 
shy child, Daniel became a target of insult and bullying by peers, as his father’s 
situation became a spectacle in the community. Visiting his father in the prison was 
a terrifying experience that left him traumatized.  
 
Although in some ways Daniel was safer in those years with his father away 
from the home, life was challenging for him and his siblings without their father 
there. Despite the abuse and early childhood instability he endured, he managed to 
hold on to an innate positivity and drive to succeed, to overcome the generational 
inheritance of violence and adversity in his family. As Daniel grew, he chose not to 
become angry or bitter but rather to take a path of resilience and strength and, 
ultimately, break the cycle of abuse. 
 
When Daniel was sixteen, he ran away from his father’s home and traveled to 
Israel to reunite with his mother. After their reunion in Israel, he took odd jobs to 
help contribute to the household. In 1994, Daniel got married and had three 
Case 3:25-cr-00215-RK     Document 18     Filed 09/19/24     Page 3 of 6 PageID: 48

 
4
daughters, all of whom are now adults who miss their father very much. Despite his 
marriage eventually ending in divorce, he and his ex-wife, Sophie, still remain close 
and enjoy a deep and respectful relationship.  
 
Daniel began his business, Seldat, which grew exponentially and was known as 
a pleasant and safe environment to work in. His mission was to ensure that every 
employee or associate was treated with great respect. He was a compassionate boss, 
providing catered lunch every day and generous salary and benefits. Many of Daniel’s 
current and previous employees shared their experiences and gratitude to Daniel in 
the attached character letters. The letters convey deep appreciation, respect, and 
admiration for Daniel.  
 
 Daniel’s heart always looked at the struggles people endured in life, and he 
became a true philanthropist and humanitarian. As a practicing member of the 
Jewish faith, he also founded Lev Echad, a foundation dedicated to the vision of 
growing and empowering the Torah and its scholars and supporting individuals and 
communities in every possible aspect of the course of human life. As evidenced from 
the attached donation receipts, Daniel has donated much of his own money to Lev 
Echad. He had also developed programs and initiatives such as the Children and 
Youth Project, the Challenged Youth Project, financial support in Israeli Yeshivas 
teaching Torah to countless Jewish men and women, and The Great Matchmaking 
Project.  
 
Daniel is also focused on serving various needy communities. To that end, he 
supports eight Israeli dental clinics to deliver dental treatment to underserved 
communities. He enlists the dentists and pays the rent for these clinics. His 
generosity and altruism are known broadly, and those who have been on the 
receiving end of his charitable endeavors, including those who have worked at or 
received treatment from the dental clinics he’s helped support, have also expressed 
their gratitude and support in the attached character letters. As Dr. Steven Katz, 
DDS, writes, “These [dental] clinics are open to any poor person, non-discriminatory 
of race, color, or religion. I could only have done this with the help and support of 
Daniel Dadoun.”  
 
Daniel is currently married to the love of his life, Odelya Golan. They are 
eternally grateful for the bond they share, for the incredible healing they both receive 
from a relationship filled with love, truth, respect, kindness and trust. Odelya has 
two daughters from a previous marriage, whom Daniel has treated and considers as 
his own. Odelya’s daughters were abandoned by their biological father, and as 
someone who has experienced parental abandonment, Daniel has given them the 
safety, security, and a father they needed.  
 
Daniel is sorely missed by his beloved wife and daughters, all of whom reside in 
Israel. He is also missed by his company and foundation, and the friends and 
families who’s lives he’s helped improved. They all pray for his release and safety 
every day. Due to his faith, Daniel has refused to take his yarmulke off while 
incarcerated in the Essex County Correctional Facility, opening him up to vicious and 
violent antisemitism on an almost daily basis by his fellow inmates. Despite this 
Case 3:25-cr-00215-RK     Document 18     Filed 09/19/24     Page 4 of 6 PageID: 49

 
5
violence and a myriad of threats, he persists in wearing his yarmulke every day, 
refusing to compromise his faith for his own personal health and safety.   
 
Mr. Dadoun does not have any criminal history or record, further evidencing 
that he does not pose a risk of harm or danger to anyone. Moreover, the allegations in 
this case (bank fraud and transacting in criminal proceeds) are non-violent offenses, 
and there is no allegation that Mr. Dadoun’s alleged conduct caused any physical 
harm to any person. His documented history of charity and generosity demonstrate 
that he is not someone that would violate any release conditions the Court imposes.  
 
Similarly, Mr. Dadoun is not a flight risk. Even though he is not a United 
States citizen, this does not mean he would not remain in the United States if 
released. While he has no intention of fleeing, the surrendering of all travel 
documents, as well as electronic monitoring and/or home detention, are conditions 
that could be imposed to further lessen any risk of flight.  
 
As a result of the foregoing, it is unbelievably clear that there are reasonable 
conditions that can be imposed on Mr. Dadoun that would guarantee the Court and 
the Government that he would not pose a risk of flight or danger to the community at 
large.  
 
3. Bail Package 
 
 
As stated above, U.S. Pretrial Services has recommended Mr. Dadoun’s release. 
Pretrial Services has also approved a co-signer and custodian, Mr. Moti Zibler, whom 
Mr. Dadoun would reside with, as his home and family remain in Israel. In addition 
to a custodian and co-signer, Mr. Dadoun has also offered three properties to be 
pledged as security for his release, all of which have been confirmed by Pretrial 
Services to be unencumbered and of significant value.2 All of these properties are 
owned by LLC.’s that are directly owned by Daniel Dadoun.  
 
 
In addition to monitoring by Pretrial Services, Mr. Dadoun would be compliant 
under any release conditions the Court finds suitable in this case—no matter how 
lenient or strict they may be.   
 
 
Conclusion 
 
 
Mr. Dadoun respectfully submits that the Government cannot satisfy its 
burden that he clearly and convincingly poses a threat to the community or risk of 
flight that the proposed conditions of release cannot satisfy. Accordingly, the defense 
respectfully requests that the Court release Mr. Dadoun under any conditions 
deemed suitable.  
 
2 These three properties are:  
1. 120 Raymon Road in Washington Township, Warren County, New Jersey.  
2. 294 Birmingham Road in Pemberton Township, Burlington County, New Jersey.  
3. Rt. 68 DiTullio Farm, Mansfield Township, Burlington County, New Jersey.  
Case 3:25-cr-00215-RK     Document 18     Filed 09/19/24     Page 5 of 6 PageID: 50

 
6
 
 
 
 
 
 
Respectfully submitted, 
 
 
 
 
ANTHONY POPE LAW, P.C.  
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Anthony Pope  
 
  
 
 
 
 
ANTHONY POPE, ESQ. 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Case 3:25-cr-00215-RK     Document 18     Filed 09/19/24     Page 6 of 6 PageID: 51

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.njd.565817.18.0.pdf

Size

130,317 bytes

SHA-256

dd9bb8faf8c78d33b3bf60b49f00d2cc57747c0fa1f9098c9dccf0c220e26999

Our copy

gov.uscourts.njd.565817.18.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)