United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Tacoma
Theresa L. Fricke United States Magistrate Judge
MATTER comes on for hearing concerning the release or
detention of the defendant under the Bail Reform Act, 18
U.S.C. § 3142. The defendant was indicted on June 5,
2019 on two charges of Abusive Sexual Contact. (Dkt. 1).
government appears through Assistant United States Attorney
Ye-Ting Woo. The defendant appears personally and is
represented by counsel, Assistant Federal Public Defender
United States Probation and Pretrial Services Office appears
through United States Probation Officer Nick Bassett, and has
filed (Dkt. 5, 11) a pretrial report, and supplemental
ORDERED that the defendant: Shall be detained.
Court, having conducted a detention hearing pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 3142, has considered all the factors in the
Bail Reform Act. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e), (g) and finds that
no condition or combination of conditions which defendant can
meet will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant
as required and/or the safety of any other person and the
Court reviewed the documents in the electronic docket for
this matter, including the allegations in the Indictment, and
considered the arguments and information presented during the
hearing. The defendant is charged with two counts of Abusive
Sexual Contact 18 U.S.C. § 2244(a)(5), 2246(3) and 1153.
These charges do not trigger the rebuttable presumption of
are four factors taken into consideration when determining
whether there are conditions of release that will reasonably
assure the appearance of the person as required and the
safety of any other person and the community: 1. Nature and
seriousness of the charges; 2. Weight of the evidence against
the defendant; 3. History and characteristics of the
defendant; and 4. “Nature and seriousness of the danger
to any person or the community that would be posed by the
person's release.” 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g)(1)-(4).
The Bail Reform Act recognizes that release should be the
normal course, and “detention prior to trial or without
trial is the carefully limited exception.” United
States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739, 755 (1987). In
evaluating whether the defendant poses a serious potential
for dangerousness, it is not necessary for the Government to
produce, or for the Court to rely on, evidence of prior
convictions for violent crimes. United States v.
Hir, 517 F.3d 1081, 1091-92 (9th Cir. 2008);
United States v. Rodriguez, 950 F.2d 85, 88-89 (2d
the first factor, charges against the defendant are very
serious. The Indictment (Dkt. 1) alleges two counts of
Abusive Sexual Contact against the alleged victim - his
granddaughter - a minor under twelve years of age. Sentencing
for this can be for any term of years including life
imprisonment. 18 U.S.C. § 2244(a)(5).
second factor, the weight of the evidence, is difficult to
assess at this stage, and the Court does not rely heavily on
third factor, history and circumstances of the defendant,
shows an extensive criminal history and failures to appear
before the court along with historical allegations that
suggest that the defendant is not trustworthy and is a danger
to the community.
defendant, age 65, has lived in Western Washington his entire
life. He has multiple health issues that limit his mobility,
but according to testimony of his first cousin, Ms. Joseph,
he is still capable of making the 20-30 minute drive (each
way) from his home to Ms. Joseph's home to help take care
of Ms. Joseph's mother.
pretrial services supplemental report (Dkt. 5) gives the
criminal history of the defendant. It extends from 1975 to
2008 beginning with multiple indecent exposure charges,
replete with assault, drug, and DUI charges, and noting seven
instances of failures to appear. While the last charges are
11 years ago, the repeated wanton disregard for the law gives
a preponderance of evidence that the defendant's
appearance cannot be reasonably assured.
there have been allegations of past incidents of sexual abuse
against minors ...