United States District Court, D. Arizona
Honorable John Z. Boyle United States Magistrate Judge.
October 25, 2018, an initial appearance was held for
Defendant Gordon Hardy. (Doc. 12.) On November 8, 2018, the
Court heard argument from the parties regarding detention.
The Court has also considered the pretrial service reports,
any memoranda, exhibits, and proffers of the parties. The
Court finds Defendant's detention as a flight risk is
required under the Bail Reform Act.
age 55, is an Arizona resident. He has prior felony
convictions for Robbery (1989, 1989, 1995), Theft (1992),
Felon in Possession of a Weapon (2000), Possession of
Narcotic Drugs for Sale (2004), and Possession of Narcotic
and Dangerous Drugs for Sale (2005). He was released from
imprisonment in late 2013 or early 2014. He has an Arizona
Medical Marijuana card and has a prescription for Oxycontin
to assist with pain from a serious back injury. Defendant has
no known international travel. Defendant has been unemployed
for at least 13 years.
November 7, 2018, Defendant was screened for Crossroads
placement and found unsuitable for placement due to a lack of
candor with staff. Defendant denies he was dishonest with
Crossroads staff. Defendant's family and friends were
present in court on his behalf during the detention hearing.
The Bail Reform Act.
government seeks the detention of Defendant on the ground
that he is a serious flight risk and no release condition or
combination of conditions exist that would reasonably assure
his appearance at future court proceedings if released. After
considering the memoranda, exhibits, proffers, argument, and
all of the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. §3142(g), the
Court finds that the government has proven by a preponderance
of the evidence that Defendant is a serious flight risk and
no combination of conditions exist that would reasonably
assure his appearance at future court proceedings.
Standard of Review.
Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3141-3150, mandates
the release of a person pending trial unless the court
“[f]inds that no condition or combination of conditions
will reasonably assure the appearance of the person as
required and the safety of any other person and the
community.” United States v. Hir, 517 F.3d
1081, 1086 (9th Cir. 2008) (quoting 18 U.S.C. §
3142(e)). This Court engages in a two-step inquiry before
ordering a defendant either be released or detained pending
trial. First, the Court must determine whether a defendant
presents a “serious risk that [the defendant] will
flee, ” if released from custody. 18 U.S.C. §
3142(f)(2)(A)). Second, if a defendant is likely to flee, the
Court must determine whether some set of conditions would
sufficiently vitiate that risk. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g). The
government bears the burden of showing by a preponderance of
the evidence that the defendant poses a flight risk.
United States v. Gebro, 948 F.2d 1118, 1121 (9th
determining whether release conditions exist that would
reasonably assure a defendant's appearance, Section
3142(g) requires a district court to consider the following
(1) the nature and circumstances of the offense charged,
including whether the offense is a crime of violence, a
violation of section 1591, a Federal crime of terrorism, or
involves a minor victim or a controlled substance, firearm,
explosive, or destructive device;
(2) the weight of the evidence against the person;
(3) the history and characteristics of the person,
(A) the person's character, physical and mental
condition, family ties, employment, financial resources,
length of residence in the community, community ties, past
conduct, history relating to drug or alcohol abuse, criminal