United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Tacoma
Theresa L. Fricke United States Magistrate Judge.
COURT, having conducted a detention hearing on December 27,
2019 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sect. 3142, 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
defendant is charged with Illegal Reentry After Deportation
under 8 U.S.C. §1326(a). Dkt. 10, Information. Counsel
informed the Court during the detention hearing that the
parties were stipulating to detention. Defense counsel
referred to the fact that Mr. Espinoza-Aguilar has an
immigration detainer, as one reason that the defense was
stipulating to detention. The Court indicated on the record
that it was not going to consider the civil immigration
detainer as a basis for accepting the stipulation. The Court
accepts the stipulation for different reasons, as described
Court has not considered either the probability of removal
due to immigration proceedings, or the effect of an
immigration detainer. United States v.
Santos-Flores, 794 F.3d 1088, 1092(9th Cir.
2015). The Court has not considered immigration status as a
factor in the decision to detain Mr. Espinoza-Aguilar, nor
has the Court speculated on what may or may not occur in Mr.
Espinoza-Aguilar's civil immigration proceedings.
United States v. Diaz-Hernandez, 943 F.3d 1196, 1199
(9th Cir. 2019).
government met its burden of proving by a preponderance of
the evidence that the defendant presents a significant risk
of flight based on the defendant's history of repeated
criminal conduct concerning evading the immigration laws of
the United States and is currently subject to a 5-year
no-contact order as a result of an Assault in the Fourth
Degree - Domestic Violence charge in Clark County District
Court, Vancouver, Washington. First Supplemental Pretrial
Report at 2-3; Dkt. 1, Complaint at 3. The Court considered
this no-contact order as evidence of both the potential for
flight or failure to appear, as well as evidence of
dangerousness to others or to the community.
Court also finds there exists clear and convincing evidence
that the defendant presents a significant risk of danger to
others and to the community. The defendant has a pending
charge from November 20, 2019 in Clark County, Washington,
involving domestic violence, and the Court may draw a
reasonable inference from the fact there are two individuals
listed in a five-year no- contact order from Clark County.
The Court may infer from the charges and the no-contact order
that the defendant's violent conduct was directed toward
persons with whom he is in a close relationship, as well as
others in the community. Second Supplemental Pretrial
Services Report at 2-3; Dkt. 1, Complaint at 3.
with conditions by which the defendant's whereabouts
could potentially be monitored, the Court finds that there
are no conditions of release that would effectively mitigate
the potential for failure to appear, flight to avoid
prosecution, or repeated behavior of evading the United
States immigration laws; and the charges of Fourth Degree
Assault - Domestic Violence along with a currently effective
no-contact order issued November 21, 2019 also shows that he
has not demonstrated law abiding behavior in the community.
All of these circumstances convince the Court that his threat
to the community continues and his behavior cannot be
successfully controlled. In addition, defense counsel
indicated during the hearing that another reason the
defendant was stipulating to detention is that defendant has
no residence that could be proposed for pretrial release.
the defendant has a girlfriend and a 6-month-old-child, which
would constitute substantial ties to the community where he
was residing, and he also has been working at a restaurant in
Vancouver, Washington for about two years, there are no
conditions or combination of conditions that would be stable
or reliable in terms of regulating his ability to control his
behavior. The defendant's history of domestic violence
charges and a no-contact order constitutes clear and
convincing evidence of violent acts toward persons (two
persons identified in the no-contact order) with whom he has
a close relationship. The circumstances of the current
offense - defendant, a citizen of Mexico, re-entering the
United States despite having no authorization to return after
being removed (Dkt. 1, Complaint, at 2-4) - show by a
preponderance of evidence that he would be a risk of
non-appearance and flight, because he has shown the ability
to avoid detection for at least two years while living in
Vancouver, Washington after reentering. Dkt. 1, Complaint at
3; Second Supplemental Pretrial Services Report at 1-2.
decision is based on 1) the nature and circumstances of the
offense(s) charged, 2) the weight of the evidence against the
person; 3) the history and characteristics of the person; and
4) the nature and seriousness of the danger release would
impose to any person or the community.
The defendant shall be committed to the custody of the
Attorney General for confinement in a corrections facility
separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or
serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal.
The defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for
private consultation with counsel.
The defendant shall on order of a court of the United States
or on request of an attorney for the Government, be delivered
to a United States Marshal for the purpose of ...