United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Texarkana Division
ORDER OF DETENTION
HONORABLE BARRY A. BRYANT UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
record reflects that on August 1, 2016, the Defendant
appeared for an initial appearance on a Petition for Action
on alleged violations of Supervised Release. ECF No. 1735.
The Petition alleged new criminal law violations, failure to
report to the United States Probation Office (USPO) as
directed, failure to be truthful to the USPO, failure to
maintain employment, and failure to keep the USPO apprised of
any change of address. Defendant was appointed counsel and
waived a detention hearing. ECF No. 1741. Thereafter,
Defendant requested a detention hearing and one was scheduled
for September 12, 2016. As discussed below, I find the
Defendant should be DETAINED pending a final revocation
Standard for Release
case involving a petition to revoke supervised release the
court is governed by F.R.Cr.P. 32.1. Rule 32.1(a)(6) states:
Release or Detention. The magistrate judge
may release or detain the person under 18 U.S.C. §
3143(a)(1) pending further proceedings. The burden of
establishing by clear and convincing that the person will not
flee or pose a danger to any other person or to the community
rests with the person [the defendant].
court must consider the factors set out in 18 U.S.C. §
3142 when making a detention decision under Rule 32.1. Unlike
a pretrial proceeding, in a revocation proceeding, the
defendant has the burden of establishing by clear and
convincing evidence he is neither a risk of flight or a
danger to others or the community.
Government called United States Probation Officer Christie
Constant. Ms. Constant testified regarding Defendant's
failure to comply with all of the terms and conditions of his
supervised release. Specifically, she testified regarding
pending state criminal charges, in both Arkansas and Texas,
wherein the Defendant is alleged to have possessed with
intent to distribute controlled substances. She also
testified regarding a recent allegation of domestic violence.
The charge of domestic violence was ultimately dismissed by
state authorities after the complaining witness recanted her
Government also relied on the USPO recommendation of no
release pending a final hearing.
Defendant called no witnesses. Defense counsel proffered, the
1. Defendant was eligible to reapply for employment at
Buffalo Wild Wings.
2. Defendant had in fact worked for Tyson's Inc. for a
period of time.
3. One of the pending state charges for possession of a
controlled substance could be charged as a misdemeanor rather
than a felony.
undersigned reviewed the evidence and information submitted
by the parties, the Indictment, the information and
recommendation of the USPO, and the argument of counsel.