This case comes before the Court on the United States' motion for review of the Magistrate Judge's March 16, , Order releasing Defendant Mario Alvares Cardenas on bond pending trial in this matter. The Court has reviewed the parties' submissions, heard the parties' arguments, and reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Order.
The Court finds that the United States has met its burden of proving that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure either Cardenas' appearance in Court as required, or the safety of the community. Defendant Mario Alvaro Cardenas is charged in a one-count Indictment with transportation of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.
He has been in custody since his November 14, , initial appearance in the Central District of California. On Thursday, March 15, , the Magistrate Judge held a detention hearing and heard both parties' proffers regarding whether any combination of release conditions could reasonably assure Cardenas' appearance at trial and the safety of the community.
After this hearing, the Magistrate Judge ordered Cardenas released once his sureties could post bond, and under conditions specified in his Order and, for the most part, required by the Adam Walsh Act at 18 U. This Court's review of a magistrate judge's release order is governed by 18 U. If a person is ordered released by a magistrate judge,. In reviewing a magistrate judge's detention order, the district court makes its own independent determination of whether the magistrate judge's decision was correct, with no deference to the magistrate judge's findings or conclusions.
United States v. Koenig, F. In conducting this de novo review, the district court may but need not hold an evidentiary hearing. In a motion for pretrial detention under the Bail Reform Act, the government bears the burden of showing by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant poses a flight risk, and by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant poses a danger to the community. Motamedi, F. The statute lists factors that may be considered in this context, such as: 1 the nature and seriousness of the offense charged; 2 the weight of the evidence against the defendant; 3 the defendant's character, physical and mental condition, family and community ties, past conduct, history relating to drug and alcohol abuse, and criminal history; and 4 the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or the community that would be posed by the defendant's release.
