United States v. Caternor, Criminal No. 2017-0153

Defendant Daniel Caternor, a Ghanaian lawful permanent resident, was indicted for conspiracy to distribute ≥100 grams of heroin and one count of distributing heroin based on FBI-controlled buys and surveillance.
A cooperating witness (CW) bought multiple heroin quantities from Caternor and his associate Kwaku Asare across 2016–2017; transactions were audio- and video-recorded and tested positive for opiates.
Evidence shows negotiations for larger shipments (hundreds of grams to a kilo) and use of coded terms (e.g., “doors,” “50”).
Search of Caternor’s residence recovered blank credit cards and a card reader; the government alleges Caternor supplied heroin to Asare.
Caternor has a limited prior record (DUI/traffic, disorderly conduct with false ID, shoplifting); he conceded the Bail Reform Act presumption applies and sought release to live with a church member under electronic monitoring.
After a detention hearing, the magistrate judge ordered Caternor detained pending trial, finding the statutory presumption unrebutted and that no conditions would assure community safety or his appearance.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the rebuttable presumption under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(3)(A) applies	Govt: Indictment establishes probable cause for a drug offense carrying ≥10-year max, triggering the presumption	Caternor conceded presumption applies	Presumption applies and remains influential in analysis
Whether defendant produced evidence to rebut the presumption	Govt: Presumption stands absent credible contrary evidence	Caternor: community ties, brief record, proposed home detention/electronic monitoring	Court: Caternor failed to produce sufficient credible evidence to rebut presumption
Whether any conditions can reasonably assure community safety	Govt: risk of large-scale narcotics trafficking and access to supply; recorded dealings and coded negotiations	Caternor: proposed third-party custodian, home detention, electronic monitoring	Court: Conditions proposed insufficient given seriousness, access to associates, and risk of reoffense
Whether any conditions can reasonably assure appearance	Govt: flight risk given potential long sentence and past false ID incident	Caternor: ties to community and proposed supervision	Court: By preponderance, no set of conditions would reasonably assure appearance; detention ordered

Salerno, 489 U.S. 739 (statutory detention justified to protect community)
Perry, 788 F.2d 100 (danger to community supports detention)
Sazenski, 806 F.2d 846 (same)
Simpkins, 826 F.2d 94 (burden of persuasion for flight risk decisions)
Alatishe, 768 F.2d 364 (defendant must produce evidence to rebut statutory presumption)
Stone, 608 F.3d 939 (defendant should present special features to rebut presumption)
Jessup, 757 F.2d 378 (discussing when cases fall outside congressional paradigm)
Bess, 678 F. Supp. 929 (presumption reflects congressional factual view about risk)
Mercedes, 254 F.3d 433 (burden of persuasion remains with government)
Dominguez, 783 F.2d 702 (presumption remains part of §3142(g) analysis)