U.S. v. Jimenez, 96-1705
| Decision Date | 22 November 1996 |
| Docket Number | No. 96-1705,96-1705 |
| Parties | NOTICE: THIS SUMMARY ORDER MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENTIAL AUTHORITY, BUT MAY BE CALLED TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COURT IN A SUBSEQUENT STAGE OF THIS CASE, IN A RELATED CASE, OR IN ANY CASE FOR PURPOSES OF COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL OR RES JUDICATA. SEE SECOND CIRCUIT RULE 0.23. UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. Angel JIMENEZ, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
FOR APPELLANT: Sharon L. McCarthy, A.U.S.A., S.D.N.Y., New York, NY.
FOR APPELLEE: Gail Laser, New York, NY.
Before LUMBARD, McLAUGHLIN and CABRANES, Circuit Judges.
This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of record from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and was argued.
ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, it is hereby ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the judgment of the district court be and it hereby is REVERSED.
Angel Jimenez ("Jimenez") is a member of the "Latin Kings," a notoriously violent criminal organization engaged in racketeering. Jimenez's wife is a member of a related organization, the "Latin Queens."
In order to improve his standing in the Latin Kings, Jimenez conspired with other members of the organization to kill Jose Suarez ("Suarez"). Jimenez and others abducted Suarez in Upstate New York, beat him, and brought him to Manhattan. Once in Manhattan, Jimenez and his cohorts continued to beat Suarez. They stabbed him in the neck and left him for dead under the West Side Highway. Suarez survived.
Jimenez was indicted in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Cedarbaum, J.) for conspiracy to murder in aid of racketeering activity and attempted murder in aid of racketeering, both in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5). At arraignment, the government sought pretrial detention on the grounds of dangerousness, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f).
The district court ordered Jimenez released pending trial on the condition that: (1) he remain under house arrest with an electronic monitoring bracelet and be permitted to leave his home only for doctors' appointments and attorney visits; (2) he consent to having his phone tapped; and (3) his wife agree not to contact any member of the Latin Kings or Queens.
The government appeals, arguing that the district court clearly erred when it released Jimenez on bail.
We review a district court's factual findings underlying a determination of whether a defendant is a danger to the community for clear error. United States v. Ferranti, 66 F.3d 540, 542 (2d Cir.1995). The scope of review is "slightly broader with respect to the ultimate determination that a defendant does, or does not, present a risk to the citizenry." Id. Whether certain bail conditions protect the public is reviewed...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Karper
...was the means chosen by Congress in the Bail Reform Act to protect the community from dangerous defendants.”); United States v. Jimenez, 104 F.3d 354 (2d Cir.1996). When detention is based wholly or in part on a determination of dangerousness, such finding must be supported by clear and con......
-
United States v. Mattis
...citizen and was released on a $200,000 bond secured by only a $5,000 cash deposit and therefore was a flight risk); United States v. Jimenez , 104 F.3d 354 (2d Cir. 1996) (reversing the order of the district court releasing defendant from pretrial detention where the defendant was previousl......