Full text
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-TNL Doc. 202 Filed 12/20/22 Page 1 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
United States of America, Case No. 22-cr-124(1) (NEB/TNL)
Plaintiff,
v. ORDER
Abdiaziz Shafii Farah,
Defendant.
Chelsea A. Walcker, Craig R. Baune, Harry Jacobs, Joseph Scott Teirab, Joseph H.
Thompson, and Matthew S. Ebert, Assistant United States Attorneys, United States
Attorney’s Office, 300 South Fourth Street, Suite 600, Minneapolis, MN 55415 (for the
Government); and
Andrew S. Birrell and Ian S. Birrell, Birrell Law Firm PLLC, 333 South Seventh
Street, Suite 3020, Minneapolis, MN 55402 (for Defendant).
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Abdiaziz Shafii Farah’s Unopposed
Motion for Reconsideration of Detention and for Release Subject to Conditions, ECF No.
184. The Court finds that the matter is suitable for determination without a hearing and is
submitted on the papers.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), a detention hearing may be reopened when there is
information that was not known at the time of the hearing “that has a material bearing on
the issue whether there are conditions of release that will reasonably assure the
appearance of [the person detained] . . . and the safety of any other person and the
community.” Section 3142(f)’s function “is to allow parties to present new information
that increases the likelihood a defendant would appear in court or decrease[s] the
1
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-TNL Doc. 202 Filed 12/20/22 Page 2 of 3
potential danger a defendant poses to an individual or the community as a whole.”
United States v. White, No. 19-cr-204 (ECT/BRT), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63741, at *4
(D. Minn. Apr. 1, 2020); see also United States v. Elburki, No. 19-00406-01-CR-W-RK,
2022 WL 1307092, at *2 (W.D. Mo. May 2, 2022) (“By its express terms, [§ 3142(f)]
applies to reconsideration of a detention order and provides that reconsideration is
permissible ‘only when there is new information that would materially influence the
judgment’ concerning potential flight risk and potential harm to any other person or the
community.” (quoting United States v. Cisneros, 328 F.3d 610, 614 (10th Cir. 2003)).
The history of Defendant’s pretrial detention and proceedings related thereto is
fully set forth in the Court’s October 31, 2022 Order, ECF No. 152. In brief, Defendant
was previously detained based on a finding that there is no condition or combination of
conditions that would reasonably assure that Defendant would not flee. As reflected in
Defendant’s motion, Defendant and the Government have met and conferred and arrived
at proposed conditions of release pursuant to which the Government does not oppose
Defendant’s motion for reconsideration and release. The parties have also consulted with
U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services regarding proposed conditions of release. See ECF
No. 199. The Court finds that the modified conditions and bond presented to the Court
by U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services, signed by Defendant, and the Government’s
approval of such terms of conditional release and bond, has a material bearing on the
issue of whether there are conditions of release that will reasonably assure the appearance
of Defendant as required.
2
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-TNL Doc. 202 Filed 12/20/22 Page 3 of 3
Based on the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED
that Defendant’s Unopposed Motion for Reconsideration of Detention and for Release
Subject to Conditions, ECF No. 184, is GRANTED, subject to the terms and conditions
of the Order Setting Conditions of Release and the Appearance Bond, signed by the
undersigned on December 20, 2022.
Date: December 20 , 2022 s/ Tony N. Leung
Tony N. Leung
United States Magistrate Judge
District of Minnesota
United States v. Farah
Case No. 22-cr-124(1) (NEB/TNL)
3