Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Moseley

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

February 20, 2018

UNITED STATES, Plaintiff,
v.
GREGORY MOSELEY, Defendant.

          ORDER GRANTING THE GOVERNMENT'S MOTION FOR ARREST WARRANT AND BOND REVOCATION [#26]

          DENISE PAGE HOOD, DENISE PAGE HOOD CHIEF JUDGE.

         I. BACKGROUND

         On October 3, 2017, an Indictment was filed against Defendant Gregory Moseley (“Moseley”), charging him with Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud (Count I), Attempt to Use a Counterfeit Access Device (Count II), Aggravated Identity Theft (Count III), and Possession of Fifteen or More Unauthorized Access Devices (Count IV). (Doc # 1) On October 12, 2017, Moseley appeared for arraignment and a detention hearing on the Indictment. Magistrate Judge Majzoub ordered Moseley's release on a $10, 000 unsecured bond with conditions. (Doc # 12; Doc # 13) Under the Order Setting Conditions of Release (Doc # 12), Moseley was prohibited from, among other things, violating federal, state, or local law, and from using any false identification or any identification information of another person. (Id. at Pg. 1-3)

         On January 31, 2018, Johnson was charged by Superseding Indictment with Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud (Count I), Attempt to Use a Counterfeit Access Device (Count II), Aggravated Identity Theft (Count III), Fifteen or More Unauthorized Access Devices (Count IV), Use of an Unauthorized Access Device (Count V), Use of an Unauthorized Access Device (Count VI), Possession of Device-Making Equipment (Count VII), and Production of a Counterfeit Access Device (Count VIII). (Doc # 24) Counts I-VI of the Superseding Indictment involve events that occurred from January 26, 2017 to September 20, 2017. Count VII and Count VIII were allegedly committed by Moseley on January 26, 2018, while he was released on bond. (Doc # 24, Pg. 6-7) The Superseding Indictment establishes probable cause for the offenses allegedly committed. See United States v. Hazime, 762 F.2d 34, 36-37 (6th Cir. 1985).

         This matter is presently before the Court on the Government's Motion for Arrest Warrant and Bond Revocation, filed on February 1, 2018. (Doc # 26) To date, no response has been filed. For the reasons that follow, the Government's Motion is GRANTED.

         II. ANALYSIS

         A. Motion for Revocation of Detention Order

         The Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142, requires that a defendant be released pending trial unless there are no conditions that will reasonably assure the appearance of the person at future court proceedings and the safety of the community. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e). A court may, however, order detention of the defendant if the court finds that no set of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the person and the safety of the community. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f).

         The Government requests the Court issue a warrant for Moseley's arrest and conduct a hearing to determine whether Moseley's pretrial release should be revoked in favor of an order of pretrial detention pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3148, which states:

(a) Available sanctions.--A person who has been released under section 3142 of this title, and who has violated a condition of his release, is subject to a revocation of release, an order of detention, and a prosecution for contempt of court.
(b)Revocation of release.--The attorney for the Government may initiate a proceeding for revocation of an order of release by filing a motion with the district court. A judicial officer may issue a warrant for the arrest of a person charged with violating a condition of release, and the person shall be brought before a judicial officer in the district in which such person's arrest was ordered for a proceeding in accordance with this section. To the extent practicable, a person charged with violating the condition of release that such person not commit a Federal, State, or local crime during the period of release, shall be brought before the judicial officer who ordered the release and whose order is alleged to have been violated. The judicial officer shall enter an order of revocation and detention if, after a hearing, the judicial officer--
(1) finds that there is--
(A)probable cause to believe that the person has committed a Federal, State, or local ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.