2236
Background
- Ruby Handler-Jacobs was indicted on nine counts related to an international investment fraud that allegedly stole over $50 million, including wire fraud, identity theft, and money laundering.
- Arrested December 11, 2016, and detained without bail since that date; she appeals the detention order.
- District court relied on documentary evidence of her active participation in a large, cross-border scheme involving foreign bank accounts and international travel.
- Evidence indicated she continued fraudulent activity while on bail in a New Mexico state securities-fraud matter.
- The alleged mastermind of the scheme remains at large abroad, increasing the perceived flight risk.
- Trial was scheduled for November 27, 2017, with defense counsel representing it would occur sometime after that date.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether detention without bail was justified by risk of flight | Govt: documentary evidence of large international fraud, foreign accounts, travel, and mastermind abroad shows actual flight risk | Handler-Jacobs: challenges sufficiency and argues continued detention is excessive/long | Court affirmed detention; found actual risk of flight and no conditions would reasonably assure appearance |
| Whether the § 3142(g) factors were properly weighed | Govt: factors support detention (offense nature, weight of evidence, history, danger) | Handler-Jacobs: contested the district court’s balancing of factors | Court found no clear error in district court’s weighing of the four statutory factors |
| Whether preventive detention duration violated due process | Govt: detention justified given flight risk and trial timing | Handler-Jacobs: detention without bail has been unconstitutionally long | Court reviewed de novo and held detention constitutional given strength of flight risk and relative imminence of trial |
| Standard of appellate review for detention orders | Govt: seeks deference to district court | Handler-Jacobs: urges reversal for error | Court applied deferential clear-error review for detention and de novo review for constitutional claim; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63 (2d Cir. 2007) (articulates deferential clear-error review of district court detention orders and government’s burden to prove flight risk)
- United States v. Briggs, 697 F.3d 98 (2d Cir. 2012) (sets out due-process review framework for duration of preventive detention)
- United States v. Millan, 4 F.3d 1038 (2d Cir. 1993) (supports de novo review of ultimate constitutional due process question)