United States v. Alexander
Criminal No. 2017-0150
| D.D.C. | Aug 16, 2017Background
- Defendant Butch Alexander indicted on four counts: possession with intent to distribute cocaine base (28+ g), possession with intent to distribute cocaine, possession of a firearm by a felon (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)), and use/possession of a firearm during a drug trafficking offense (18 U.S.C. § 924(c)).
- Arrested in a red Mustang after a 911 report; officers found Alexander alone in the car, a loaded .40 cal handgun between the driver seat and center console, multiple bagged drugs, a digital scale with drug residue, plastic baggies, and $1,656 cash.
- Officer body-camera video (and audio) recorded the interaction and vehicle search; government has not yet produced that video and photos shown to the court did not depict precise item locations.
- Alexander has multiple prior felony convictions for cocaine distribution and prior failures of pretrial release conditions in other jurisdictions; he was arrested previously while on pretrial release elsewhere.
- At the August 14 detention hearing the government sought pretrial detention; the court found probable cause from the indictment and imposed a rebuttable presumption of detention under the Bail Reform Act.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the rebuttable presumption of detention applies | Indictment and §924(c) exposure trigger the presumption that no conditions will assure safety/appearance | Alexander contends he can rebut via ties to community and cooperation | Court: Indictment supplies probable cause; presumption applies and was not rebutted |
| Risk to community dangerousness | Government: armed drug distribution, large quantity of drugs, scale, baggies, cash, prior similar convictions show clear danger | Alexander: no proof he knew contents, no forensic tie to gun/drugs produced yet, cooperative at scene, alleges residence near courthouse and proposes conditions | Court: By clear and convincing evidence, Alexander is a danger; detention warranted |
| Strength of evidence | Government cites drug residue on scale, body-cam video, items found in defendant's car | Defense points to absence of produced body-cam and lack of forensic linkage to defendant | Court: Evidence deemed strong (scale residue, recordings) for detention purposes despite potential suppression challenges |
| Whether conditions of release could mitigate risk | Government: prior failures of release, seriousness of armed drug distribution make conditions inadequate | Defense: proposed curfew, weekly reporting, residence with mother near courthouse would ensure appearance and safety | Court: Conditions insufficient given history and present facts; held without bond |
Key Cases Cited
- Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103 (U.S. 1975) (grand jury indictment can support probable cause findings)
- United States v. Williams, 903 F.2d 844 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (indictment may trigger presumption under 18 U.S.C. § 3142)
- United States v. Xulam, 84 F.3d 441 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (flight-risk standard — preponderance for risk of flight)
- United States v. Peralta, 849 F.2d 625 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (clear-and-convincing standard for dangerousness)
- United States v. Smith, 79 F.3d 1208 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (factors to consider under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g))
- United States v. Alatishe, 768 F.2d 364 (D.C. Cir. 1985) (defendant may rebut detention presumption with credible evidence)