Order on Objection to Magistrate Judge’s Order on Government’s Motion to Revoke Bail and for Detention — United States v. Nathan Reardon, No. 1:21-cr-00061-LEW (Dkt. 97, D. Me.)
Summary
U.S. District Judge Lance E. Walker, on June 6, 2022, affirmed and adopted the Magistrate Judge's April 21, 2022 order revoking Nathan Reardon's bail and detaining Reardon pending trial (D. Me., 1:21-cr-00061-LEW). The Magistrate Judge had found, under 18 U.S.C. § 3148(b), clear and convincing evidence that Reardon violated pretrial release conditions by applying for Emergency Rental Assistance without prior approval of the supervising officer, and that Reardon is unlikely to abide by any condition of release. Reardon objected, arguing no danger to the community and offering to abide by a condition prohibiting any application for state or federal relief while on release. After a de novo review of the record, the court concurred with the Magistrate Judge's findings and found no further proceeding necessary.
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
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEW Document 97 Filed 06/06/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) 1:21-cr-00061-LEW
)
NATHAN REARDON, )
)
Defendant )
ORDER ON OBJECTION TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S ORDER ON
GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO REVOKE BAIL AND FOR DETENTION
On April 21, 2022, the Magistrate Judge granted the Government’s motion to revoke
bail and committed Defendant Nathan Reardon to the custody of the Attorney General or
his designated representative for confinement in a corrections facility pending the trial in
this matter. Order on Mot. to Revoke Bail and for Detention (ECF No. 85). The findings
central to the Magistrate Judge’s Order, entered pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3148(b), are: (1)
that clear and convincing evidence exists that Defendant violated the conditions of his
pretrial release by applying for Emergency Rental Assistance without prior approval of the
supervising officer; and (2) that Defendant is unlikely to abide by any condition or
combination of conditions of release. These findings were sufficient to justify revocation
of release. See United States v. Quirion, 808 F. Supp. 2d 343, 346 (D. Me. 2011); United
States v. Minor, 204 Fed. App’x 453, 454 (5th Cir. 2006) (per curiam unpublished op.)
(“The statute clearly provides that these findings alone are sufficient to justify revocation
and detention; a court need not also find that the defendant will flee or pose a danger to the
community.”).
Case 1:21-cr-00061-LEW Document 97 Filed 06/06/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>
Defendant objects to the revocation of bail. He argues that he is not a danger to the
community and that he would abide by a condition of release “prohibiting any application
for state or federal relief while on release.” Objection to Mag. J. Decision (ECF No. 87).
The Government timely responded. Gov’t Opp’n (ECF No. 88). Defendant did not file a
reply.
I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge’s Order, together with the
entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the
Magistrate Judge, as necessary in a proceeding under 18 U.S.C. § 3145(b); and I concur
with his findings for the reasons set forth in his Order and determine that no further
proceeding is necessary.
It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge
is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED.
SO ORDERED.
Dated this 6th day of June, 2022.
/s/ Lance E. Walker
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
File and source
- File
- 97-order-on-objection-to-magistrate-judge-s-order-on.pdf
- Size
- 210,932 bytes
- SHA-256
- 5146993267aab389277d0922e948d03cd1a5c1221549573a1793c7d0f4a7d3cf
- Original
- No public link identified.