Court filing
Memorandum of Law in Support of Pretrial Release — United States v. Daniel Dadoun (D.N.J.)
Filed September 19, 2024 in U.S. v. Dadoun; one of 11 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2024-09-19 |
U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey · No. 2:23-mj-08137-JSA · Doc. 18 · 2024-09-19 · 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 2:23-mj-08137-JSA 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 2:23-mj-08137-JSA 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 2:23-mj-08137-JSA 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 2:23-mj-08137-JSA 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 2:23-mj-08137-JSA 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 2:23-mj-08137-JSA Document 18 Filed 09/19/24 Page 6 of 6 PageID: 51File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.njd.536411.18.0.pdf
- Size
- 130,843 bytes
- SHA-256
- 0543d2eed0ad23580897c88acdb50d58e4bd6e284b228faa919d35b07ac336ec
- Our copy
- gov.uscourts.njd.536411.18.0.pdf
- Original
- PACER (login required)