U.S. v. Wilks

Dist. Ct. erred in revoking defendant’s pretrial release based in defendant’s alleged violation of his release conditions. Record showed that: (1) defendant was released on bond with strict conditions that included home confinement with limited exceptions and additional restrictions on his activities and associations; (2) while defendant received court permission to have overnight stays from July 2-6, 2021 in Centralia, Illinois to attend two medical appointments, family wedding and religious services, defendant was found at bar in Mount Vernon, where fatal shooting occurred in defendant’s presence; and (3) restrictions also precluded defendant from having contact with co-defendants, and defendant was seen at Mt. Vernon bar talking with one co-defendant. Although govt. moved to revoke defendant’s pretrial release on ground that defendant had contact at bar with co-defendant, and that defendant had failed to inform his pretrial-services officer about said contact, Dist. Ct. based revocation on fact that defendant’s presence at bar violated home-confinement restriction. As such, Dist. Ct. erred in revoking defendant’s pretrial release, where: (1) defendant’s counsel did not have opportunity to address specific issue that Dist. Ct. was concerned about; and (2) Dist. Ct. failed to explain why defendant’s detention was necessary following his violation, according to criteria contained in 18 USC section 3148(b)(2)(A) or (B). Fact that Dist. Ct. had found existence of violation did not, by itself, permit revocation, since Dist. Ct. must make findings under section 3148(b)(1) and (b)(2) before Dist. Ct. may revoke defendant’s pretrial release.