Order — No. 3:23-cr-00198 (Dkt. 37, W.D.N.C.)

Summary

An order in United States v. Ashley Nicole Cross, Case No. 3:23-CR-00198-FDW, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, Charlotte Division, filed May 13, 2024 as Document 37 (2 pages) and signed May 13, 2024. The Court denies the United States' oral motion to revoke the defendant's bond under 18 U.S.C. § 3148, stating that it found probable cause that she violated 18 U.S.C. § 1503 but that she rebutted the presumption that no conditions could assure safety and appearance. It nonetheless states she violated the terms of her bond and modifies her release conditions to add home detention with location monitoring under the supervision of the United States Probation Office.

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

Full text

                         UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                      WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
                             CHARLOTTE DIVISION
                           CASE NO. 3:23-CR-00198-FDW

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA                              )
                                                       )
                        v.                             )
                                                       )                    ORDER
 ASHLEY NICOLE CROSS,                                  )
                                                       )
       Defendant.                                      )
                                                       )

       THIS MATTER is before the Court on United States’ oral motion to revoke Defendant’s

bond. For the reasons set forth below, the United States’ Motion is DENIED.

       Under 18 U.S.C. § 3148, a rebuttable presumption of revocation of bond arises where the
Court finds there is probable cause to support that Defendant has violated a State, Federal, or local
law. The Court has found probable cause that Defendant violated 18 U.S.C. § 1503, obstruction of
justice. The burden is now on Defendant to rebut the presumption that no condition or combination
of conditions can reasonably assure the safety of the community or the appearance of the
Defendant.

       The Court finds Defendant has rebutted the presumption. First, Defendant appeared in
Court this morning after the United States moved to revoke her Bond on Friday. Second, Defendant
contacted the witnesses in this case one to three months ago, based on the record before this Court.
She has not, based on the record, been contacting witnesses since last Tuesday when trial began.
Finally, it appears based on the record the United States became aware of the events underlying
the revocation motion on May 1 or 2, 2024, and did not move to revoke until May 10, 2024. These
factors, considered collectively, are sufficient to rebut the presumption that no condition or
combination of conditions can reasonably assure the safety of the community or the appearance of
the Defendant.

       However, Defendant has violated the terms of her Bond. For these reasons, the Court will
MODIFY the Defendant’s conditions of release. It is ORDERED that in addition to the conditions
of release previously ordered on September 21, 2023, by United States Magistrate Judge David C.


                                                 1

         Case 3:23-cr-00198-FDW Document 37 Filed 05/13/24 Page 1 of 2
Keesler, the Defendant is to comply with home detention with location monitoring under the
supervision of the United States Probation Office, including:

       1. Participate in the following location monitoring program component(s) and abide by its
       requirements as the probation officer instructs. For each component, the defendant shall
       maintain a telephone at the defendant’s place of residence without any “call forwarding”,
       “Caller ID services”, “call waiting”, dial-up computer modems, 1-800 long distance call
       block, fax machine, voice over protocol (VOIP), burglar alarm or three-way calling service.
       The location monitoring technology that will be used (i.e., Radio Frequency (RF), GPS,
       Voice Recognition, Mobile Biometric Application) is to be selected by the probation
       officer.

       2. The defendant shall submit to home detention, with location monitoring technology, and
       comply with its requirements as directed. During this time, the defendant is restricted to
       the defendant’s residence at all times except for employment; education; religious services;
       medical, substance abuse or mental health treatment; attorney visits; court appearances;
       court-ordered obligations; or other activities pre-approved by the probation officer; and

       3. Pay the cost of location monitoring not to exceed the daily contractual rate. Payment for
       the location monitoring shall be made in accordance with the probation officer’s direction.

       IT IS SO ORDERED.
                                            Signed: May 13, 2024




                                                2

         Case 3:23-cr-00198-FDW Document 37 Filed 05/13/24 Page 2 of 2


File and source

File

37.pdf

Size

134,661 bytes

SHA-256

973748144e652e7ea136b18a070df247c6ee48195b009dcfdb6f81652deb7e74

Our copy

37.pdf

Original

No public link identified.