{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "7",
    "document_number": "106",
    "date": "12/30/20",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 106 Filed 12/30/20 Page 7 of 22\ndetention without bail is warranted under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(1). The Court accordingly denies Defendant's request to reopen the original bail hearing and denies her renewed motion for bail.\n\nA. The presumption in favor of detention applies\n\nThe Court is required to presume that no condition or combination of conditions of pretrial release will reasonably assure the Defendant's appearance. The Bail Reform Act provides that if a defendant is charged with committing an offense involving a minor victim under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2422 or 2423, \"it shall be presumed that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required and the safety of the community if the judicial officer finds that there is probable cause to believe that the person committed.\" 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(3)(E). The Defendant's indictment by a grand jury suffices to establish that there is probable cause to believe that she committed the offenses charged in the indictment. See, e.g., United States v. Contreras, 776 F.2d 51, 53–54 (2d Cir. 1985) (noting that that an indictment returned by a properly constituted grand jury \"conclusively determines the existence of probable cause\" and that \"the return of an indictment eliminates the need for a preliminary examination at which a probable cause finding is made by a judicial officer pursuant to Rule 5(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.\" (citations omitted)). In light of the crimes charged in the indictment, the Court begins with the presumption that no condition or combination of conditions of pretrial release will reasonably assure the Defendant's appearance.\n\nWhen the presumption applies, the Defendant bears a limited burden of production \"tending to counter the § 3142(e) presumption of flight,\" Contreras, 776 F.2d at 53 n.1. The Defendant's burden of production only requires that she \"introduce a certain amount of evidence contrary to the presumed fact.\" United States v. Jessup, 757 F.2d 378, 380 (1st Cir. 1985),\n7\nDOJ-OGR-00002239",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 106 Filed 12/30/20 Page 7 of 22",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "detention without bail is warranted under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(1). The Court accordingly denies Defendant's request to reopen the original bail hearing and denies her renewed motion for bail.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A. The presumption in favor of detention applies",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Court is required to presume that no condition or combination of conditions of pretrial release will reasonably assure the Defendant's appearance. The Bail Reform Act provides that if a defendant is charged with committing an offense involving a minor victim under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2422 or 2423, \"it shall be presumed that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required and the safety of the community if the judicial officer finds that there is probable cause to believe that the person committed.\" 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(3)(E). The Defendant's indictment by a grand jury suffices to establish that there is probable cause to believe that she committed the offenses charged in the indictment. See, e.g., United States v. Contreras, 776 F.2d 51, 53–54 (2d Cir. 1985) (noting that that an indictment returned by a properly constituted grand jury \"conclusively determines the existence of probable cause\" and that \"the return of an indictment eliminates the need for a preliminary examination at which a probable cause finding is made by a judicial officer pursuant to Rule 5(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.\" (citations omitted)). In light of the crimes charged in the indictment, the Court begins with the presumption that no condition or combination of conditions of pretrial release will reasonably assure the Defendant's appearance.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "When the presumption applies, the Defendant bears a limited burden of production \"tending to counter the § 3142(e) presumption of flight,\" Contreras, 776 F.2d at 53 n.1. The Defendant's burden of production only requires that she \"introduce a certain amount of evidence contrary to the presumed fact.\" United States v. Jessup, 757 F.2d 378, 380 (1st Cir. 1985),",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "7",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00002239",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "12/30/20"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "Document 106",
      "DOJ-OGR-00002239"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case. The text is printed and there are no visible handwritten notes or stamps. The document is in good condition with no visible damage or redactions."
}