Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web
Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive
Search
Yahoo! News
Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com
Search
Google Blog
Search
Technorati Blog
Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Roman Rodriguez, Defendant-appellant
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. - 803 F.2d 1102
Oct. 14, 1986
Roy E. Black, Black & Furci, P.A., Miami, Fla., for defendant-appellant.
Leon B. Kellner, U.S. Atty., Michael P. Sullivan, Asst. U.S. Atty., Miami, Fla., for plaintiff-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
Before GODBOLD, VANCE and JOHNSON, Circuit Judges.
BY THE COURT:
Appellant Roman Rodriguez and others were indicted for RICO violations involving drug offenses and, in part, murder. On the issue of pretrial detention the government relied on the statutory presumption in 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3142(e) and on a detailed factual presentation. The district court applied the procedures set out in U.S. v. Hurtado, 779 F.2d 1467 (11th Cir.1985). The government's evidence emphasized potential dangerousness. The court found this evidence by the government to be credible and clear and convincing and thus that the statutory presumptions were not sufficiently rebutted to deny pretrial detention. 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3142(f)(2)(B). We find no error in these conclusions.
We agree with the Seventh and Third Circuits that allowing pretrial detention because of potential dangerousness of the accused is constitutional. U.S. v. Portes, 786 F.2d 758 (7th Cir.1986); U.S. v. Delker, 757 F.2d 1390 (3rd Cir.1985). Contra see U.S. v. Salerno, 794 F.2d 64 (2nd Cir.1986); U.S. v. Melandez-Carrion, 790 F.2d 984 (2nd Cir.1986).
The order of the district court denying pretrial release is AFFIRMED and the motion for bail pending appeal is DENIED.