Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

defendanthearingtrialwillleasecompliancebail

trialleasebail

Related Cases

United States v. Damato, Not Reported in Fed. Supp., 2020 WL 2088100

Facts

Louis Damato was charged with making threats against a U.S. official and was initially released under conditions that included residing at a halfway house. On March 29, 2020, he left the halfway house to go to the hospital and did not return, leading the government to seek revocation of his pretrial release. The court held a revocation hearing where evidence was presented regarding Damato's mental state and compliance with conditions of release.

On March 29, 2020, Mr. Damato left the half-way house to go to the hospital and did not return. This formed the basis of the government's petition seeking to revoke his pretrial release.

Issue

Did the government meet its burden to revoke Louis Damato's pretrial release under the Bail Reform Act?

Rule

Under 18 U.S.C. § 3148, the government must establish by clear and convincing evidence that a defendant violated a condition of release and then prove by a preponderance of the evidence that no conditions can assure the defendant will not flee or pose a danger to the community.

Revocation is governed by a two-step process. At the first step, the Court must determine whether there is 'probable cause to believe that the person has committed a Federal, State or local crime while on release,' or whether there is 'clear and convincing evidence that the person has violated any other condition of release.'

Analysis

The court found that the government met the first step by proving Damato violated a condition of his release by not returning to the halfway house. However, at the second step, the court determined that the government did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence that no conditions could assure Damato's appearance in court, considering his hospitalization and the circumstances surrounding his actions.

The Court is not persuaded that the government has carried this burden. To make this determination, all the Court has before it is information about the events that occurred on the dates of March 27, 2020, to March 30, 2020.

Conclusion

The court denied the government's request to revoke Damato's pretrial release, concluding that the government failed to meet its burden at the second step of the analysis.

Ultimately, the reason this Court concludes that the government has not met its burden relates to the reservations that Mr. Damato made for the Embassy Suites for March 30 to April 6, 2020.

Who won?

Louis Damato prevailed in the case because the court found that the government did not meet its burden to revoke his pretrial release.

You must be

Log In to Casey

Sign Up to Casey

Reset Your Password

Keywords

Related Cases

Gil v. Gil, 94 Conn.App. 306, 892 A.2d 318

Best Buy Stores, L.P. v. Developers Diversified Realty Corp., 247 F.R.D. 567, 69 Fed.R.Serv.3d 1035

Lilyhorn v. Dier, 214 Neb. 728, 335 N.W.2d 554

Ogden v. Groves, 241 So.2d 756

Sullivan v. Cuyler, 723 F.2d 1077