{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "5",
    "document_number": "11-1",
    "date": "July 8, 2019",
    "document_type": "Court Document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 11-1 Filed 07/12/19 Page 5 of 10\n\nHonorable Henry Pitman\nUnited States Magistrate Judge\nJuly 8, 2019\nPage 5\n\nA. The Defendant Poses an Extreme Flight Risk\n\nEach of the relevant factors to be considered as to flight risk - the nature and circumstances of the offense, the strength of the evidence, and the history and characteristics of the defendant - counsel strongly in favor of detention.\n\n1. The Nature and Circumstances of the Offense and the Strength of the Evidence\n\nThe \"nature and circumstances\" of this offense plainly favor detention. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g)(1) (specifically enumerating \"whether the offense. . . involves a minor victim\" as a factor in bail applications). Indeed, the crime of sex trafficking of a minor is so serious that for a defendant charged with that offense, there is a presumption that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant as required and the safety of the community. 18 U.S.C. § 3142 (e)(3)(E). Here, as specified in the Indictment, the defendant's conduct was committed serially, over a period of years, and affected dozens of victims.\n\nThe seriousness of the charge is also reflected in the penalties the defendant faces, which include up to 45 years of incarceration for Counts One and Two of the Indictment.3 As the Second Circuit has noted, the possibility of a severe sentence is a significant factor in assessing the risk of flight. See Jackson, 823 F.2d at 7; see also United States v. Cisneros, 328 F.3d 610, 618 (10th Cir. 2003) (defendant was a flight risk because her knowledge of the seriousness of the charges against her gave her a strong incentive to abscond); United States v. Townsend, 897 F.2d 989, 995 (9th Cir. 1990) (\"Facing the much graver penalties possible under the present indictment, the defendants have an even greater incentive to consider flight.\"). Here, the defendant is facing a statutory maximum of decades in prison. Even in the absence of means—which, as discussed in detail below, the defendant has in abundance—this fact alone would provide a compelling incentive for anyone to fail to appear. It is particularly compelling for a defendant who is 66 years old and therefore faces the very real prospect of spending the rest of his life in prison if convicted.\n\nThe likelihood of a substantial period of incarceration is buttressed by the strength of the evidence. As set forth in the Indictment, the evidence in this case is strong. The Indictment alleges that the defendant sexually abused dozens of minor victims, and the conspiracy count lists numerous overt acts committed in furtherance of the defendant's crimes.4\n\n3 The current penalties for violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1591 include a 10 year mandatory minimum sentence. However, that punishment was created through an amendment to the statute in 2006. The penalty for a violation of Section 1591 during the period charged in the Indictment, and therefore relevant here, was a maximum of 40 years' imprisonment.\n\n4 With respect to the evidence in this case, the Court should start its analysis by accepting that the Indictment is sufficient, on its own, to establish probable cause that the defendant committed the crimes of sex trafficking and sex trafficking conspiracy. Contreras, 776 F.2d at 54. (\"Were an evidentiary hearing addressing the existence of probable cause required in every § 3142(e) case in which an indictment had been filed, the court would spend scarce judicial resources considering that which a grand jury had already determined, and have less time to focus on the application of",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 11-1 Filed 07/12/19 Page 5 of 10",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Honorable Henry Pitman\nUnited States Magistrate Judge\nJuly 8, 2019\nPage 5",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A. The Defendant Poses an Extreme Flight Risk",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Each of the relevant factors to be considered as to flight risk - the nature and circumstances of the offense, the strength of the evidence, and the history and characteristics of the defendant - counsel strongly in favor of detention.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1. The Nature and Circumstances of the Offense and the Strength of the Evidence",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The \"nature and circumstances\" of this offense plainly favor detention. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g)(1) (specifically enumerating \"whether the offense. . . involves a minor victim\" as a factor in bail applications). Indeed, the crime of sex trafficking of a minor is so serious that for a defendant charged with that offense, there is a presumption that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant as required and the safety of the community. 18 U.S.C. § 3142 (e)(3)(E). Here, as specified in the Indictment, the defendant's conduct was committed serially, over a period of years, and affected dozens of victims.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The seriousness of the charge is also reflected in the penalties the defendant faces, which include up to 45 years of incarceration for Counts One and Two of the Indictment.3 As the Second Circuit has noted, the possibility of a severe sentence is a significant factor in assessing the risk of flight. See Jackson, 823 F.2d at 7; see also United States v. Cisneros, 328 F.3d 610, 618 (10th Cir. 2003) (defendant was a flight risk because her knowledge of the seriousness of the charges against her gave her a strong incentive to abscond); United States v. Townsend, 897 F.2d 989, 995 (9th Cir. 1990) (\"Facing the much graver penalties possible under the present indictment, the defendants have an even greater incentive to consider flight.\"). Here, the defendant is facing a statutory maximum of decades in prison. Even in the absence of means—which, as discussed in detail below, the defendant has in abundance—this fact alone would provide a compelling incentive for anyone to fail to appear. It is particularly compelling for a defendant who is 66 years old and therefore faces the very real prospect of spending the rest of his life in prison if convicted.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The likelihood of a substantial period of incarceration is buttressed by the strength of the evidence. As set forth in the Indictment, the evidence in this case is strong. The Indictment alleges that the defendant sexually abused dozens of minor victims, and the conspiracy count lists numerous overt acts committed in furtherance of the defendant's crimes.4",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "3 The current penalties for violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1591 include a 10 year mandatory minimum sentence. However, that punishment was created through an amendment to the statute in 2006. The penalty for a violation of Section 1591 during the period charged in the Indictment, and therefore relevant here, was a maximum of 40 years' imprisonment.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "4 With respect to the evidence in this case, the Court should start its analysis by accepting that the Indictment is sufficient, on its own, to establish probable cause that the defendant committed the crimes of sex trafficking and sex trafficking conspiracy. Contreras, 776 F.2d at 54. (\"Were an evidentiary hearing addressing the existence of probable cause required in every § 3142(e) case in which an indictment had been filed, the court would spend scarce judicial resources considering that which a grand jury had already determined, and have less time to focus on the application of",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Henry Pitman",
      "Jackson",
      "Cisneros",
      "Townsend",
      "Contreras"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "United States"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "July 8, 2019",
      "2006"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:19-cr-00490-RMB",
      "Document 11-1"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a sex trafficking case. The text is well-formatted and printed, with no visible handwriting or stamps. The content discusses the defendant's flight risk and the strength of the evidence against them."
}