Motion for Pretrial Detention and Hearing — No. 4:25-cr-00538 (Dkt. 4, E.D. Mo.)

Summary

A Motion for Pretrial Detention and Hearing, Doc. 4 filed October 28, 2025 in the Eastern District of Missouri (Case 4:25-cr-00538-MAL, No. 4:25-CR-538-MAL-JSD), United States v. Jimmie Moorehead, filed by U.S. Attorney Thomas C. Albus and Assistant U.S. Attorney Amy E. Sestric. The defendant is charged with conspiracy to make false statements related to health care matters and eight counts of making false statements related to health care matters under 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 and 1035. The government argues there is a serious risk of flight, citing a history of probation revocations, incidents with law enforcement officers and the strength of the evidence, and that no conditions can assure his appearance or community safety. It relies on Section 3142(f)(2) and Eighth Circuit authority and seeks a hearing within three days.

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

Cite this document

“Motion for Pretrial Detention and Hearing — No. 4:25-cr-00538 (Dkt. 4, E.D. Mo.).” Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/motion-for-pretrial-detention-and-hearing-no-4-25-cr-00538-dkt-4-e-d-m-9d8c14ca84/, SHA-256 c7bda87c83ff73538945392ae9d537d72c53c581c784640a6b463ca58e19e5ec.

Full text

Case: 4:25-cr-00538-MAL Doc. #: 4 Filed: 10/28/25 Page: 1 of 6 PageID #: 27

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) No. 4:25-CR-538-MAL-JSD
)
JIMMIE MOOREHEAD, )
)
Defendant. )

MOTION FOR PRETRIAL DETENTION AND HEARING

COMES NOW the United States of America (the “Government”), by and through Thomas

C. Albus, United States Attorney, and Amy E. Sestric, Assistant United States Attorney, for the

Eastern District of Missouri, and hereby moves the Court to order Defendant Jimmie Moorehead

(“Defendant”) detained pending trial, and requests that a detention hearing be held within three

days of Defendant’s initial appearance, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section

3142(f)(2). In support of this motion, the Government states as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. Defendant is charged with conspiracy to make false statement related to health care

matters and with eight counts of making false statements related to health care matters. 18 U.S.C.

§§ 371, 1035. Because of Defendant’s history of defying court-imposed requirements (including

probation revocations) and violence with law enforcement officers (including at least one arrest

for resisting arrest and several incidents regarding assaults of law enforcement officers), as well

as the strength of the evidence, the case involves a serious risk that Defendant will flee. Further,

there is no condition or combination of conditions that will reasonably assure his future appearance
Case: 4:25-cr-00538-MAL Doc. #: 4 Filed: 10/28/25 Page: 2 of 6 PageID #: 28

or assure the safety of any other person and the community, and Defendant should be detained

pending trial.

LEGAL STANDARD

2. Under the Bail Reform Act, a defendant must be detained where—as here—two

conditions are met: (1) the case involves a serious risk of a defendant’s flight, and (2) no conditions

can reasonably assure the defendant’s appearance or the safety of the community. See 18 U.S.C.

§ 3142(f)(2)(A) (“The judicial officer shall hold a [detention] hearing . . . in a case that involves -

- a serious risk that such person will flee[.]”); 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(1) (the “judicial officer shall

order the detention of the person . . . [i]f, after a [detention] hearing . . . the judicial officer finds

that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the person

. . . and the safety of any other person and the community”).

3. As the Eighth Circuit has made clear, in determining whether these two conditions

are met, this Court need not conduct a “rigid two-step inquiry.” United States v. Cook, 87 F.4th

920, 924 (8th Cir. 2023). Rather, this Court “permissibly conduct[s] the two inquiries in a single

detention hearing,” in part, because “the two inquires, while not identical, substantially overlap.”

Id. Indeed, the Eighth Circuit has recognized that “the § 3142(g) factors . . . are relevant both to

determining whether [the] Defendant presents a serious risk of flight and [whether] there are

conditions of release that will reasonably assure Defendant’s appearance.” Id. (quoting United

States v. Santos-Flores, 794 F.3d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 2015)).

ARGUMENT

4. As explained below, there is a serious risk that Defendant will flee if not detained

pending trial, and there is no condition or combination of conditions that will reasonably assure

his appearance.

2
Case: 4:25-cr-00538-MAL Doc. #: 4 Filed: 10/28/25 Page: 3 of 6 PageID #: 29

5. Defendant has a lengthy and violent criminal history, has no known stable

employment, and has a history of arrests and convictions related to assaulting law enforcement

officers, resisting arrest, and violating court orders, including probation conditions. The

overwhelming strength of the evidence against Defendant also heightens his flight risk.

6. Defendant’s history includes thwarting law enforcement, weighing heavily in favor

of finding a serious risk that he will flee. Defendant’s criminal history includes several arrests and

at least one guilty plea to assaulting a law enforcement officer. Additionally, in 2005, Defendant

was arrested for resisting arrest.

7. Additionally, Defendant’s history includes violating conditions of court-supervised

release, demonstrating that he is unlikely to abide by any conditions imposed by the Court here, to

include appearing as required. Following a 2004 conviction for first degree tampering with a

motor vehicle, Defendant’s probation was revoked in 2006, and then again in 2008. Defendant’s

disregard for court-imposed requirements is also evidenced by his 2008 conviction for failure to

pay child support.

8. In addition to having the ability to flee, Defendant has an incentive to flee based on

the strength of the evidence against him. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g)(2). The evidence that Defendant

fraudulently represented that he needed and obtained home health care services that he never

received is overwhelming. This includes, but is not limited to, many hours of surveillance footage

of Defendant’s residence demonstrating that personal care attendants never arrived to provide

services. Moreover, the surveillance footage shows Defendant doing activities, such as lifting

heavy equipment, that he claimed he could not do in order to convince state officials that he needed

home health care services. The evidence further clearly shows that Defendant financially

benefitted from the conspiracy; mobile app data unequivocally shows that payments went from the

3
Case: 4:25-cr-00538-MAL Doc. #: 4 Filed: 10/28/25 Page: 4 of 6 PageID #: 30

owner of the home health care company, to Defendant’s co-conspirator and domestic partner (co-

defendant Johnika Davis), and then directly to Defendant.

9. Further, Defendant’s history and characteristics necessitate his detention. See 18

U.S.C. § 3142(g)(3).

10. Defendant is a danger to the community. His lengthy criminal history, which goes

all the way back to the 1990s, includes, among other things, a 2013 conviction for second degree

burglary, a 2012 arrest for second degree domestic assault, a 2008 conviction for tampering with

a motor vehicle in the first degree, and numerous other arrests pertaining to domestic violence,

tampering with motor vehicles, stealing, and assaults.

11. Additionally, despite Defendant’s status as a felon, loaded firearms were found at

his residence on the date of his arrest for the instant offenses, October 28, 2025. According to the

United States Marshals Service, a semi-automatic shot gun and a nine-millimeter pistol were

located in between the mattresses on Defendant’s side of the bed (in that the nightstand next to

that side of the bed held Defendant’s wallet and a prescription bottle with his name on it). Both

firearms were loaded. Also near Defendant’s side of the bed was a bulletproof vest, 18 U.S.C.

§ 391, and skeleton mask.

12. In sum, the totality of the relevant factors set forth in Section 3142(g) demonstrate

that Defendant presents a serious flight risk and that there is no condition or combination of

conditions that will reasonably assure his appearance in the future and/or the safety of the

community.

WHEREFORE, the Government requests that the Court hold a detention hearing within

three days of Defendant’s initial appearance and, following such hearing, order that Defendant be

detained pending trial.

4
Case: 4:25-cr-00538-MAL Doc. #: 4 Filed: 10/28/25 Page: 5 of 6 PageID #: 31

Respectfully submitted,

THOMAS C. ALBUS
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

/s/ Amy E. Sestric
Amy E. Sestric, #66219MO
ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
Thomas F. Eagleton Courthouse
111 South Tenth Street, 20th Floor
St. Louis, Missouri 63102
(314) 539-2200

5
Case: 4:25-cr-00538-MAL Doc. #: 4 Filed: 10/28/25 Page: 6 of 6 PageID #: 32

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on October 28, 2025, the foregoing was filed electronically with the

Clerk of the Court to be served by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system upon all

Counsel of Record.

/s/ Amy E. Sestric .
Amy E. Sestric
Assistant United States Attorney

File and source

File: 4.pdf
Size: 158,906 bytes
SHA-256: c7bda87c83ff73538945392ae9d537d72c53c581c784640a6b463ca58e19e5ec
Our copy: 4.pdf
Original: No public link identified.