United States v. Dibee, 6:06-cr-60011

Defendant Joseph Dibee is charged in a second superseding indictment with conspiracy and arson-related federal offenses tied to a string of arsons in the late 1990s/early 2000s.
Before initial indictment, Dibee met with government attorneys, then left the U.S. and lived abroad for over a decade; he was arrested and returned to the U.S. in 2018.
Magistrate Judge Acosta ordered initial detention; after 16 months Dibee moved for release and the district court initially ordered release, but the Ninth Circuit vacated that order and remanded, directing continued detention pending reconsideration.
On reconsideration the district court found the statutory rebuttable presumption of detention applied, that Dibee had produced evidence rebutting it, and evaluated the § 3142(g) factors.
The court concluded Dibee rebutted the presumption and is not shown by clear and convincing evidence to be dangerous, but is a flight risk by a preponderance of the evidence based on his clandestine departure and long avoidance of U.S. authorities.
The court denied Dibee’s motion for release without prejudice and ordered the government to file a status report on his medical condition and confinement.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Standard of review for magistrate detention order	De novo review of magistrate's order	Same	Court applied de novo review per Koenig
Applicability and effect of § 3142(e)(3) presumption	Presumption applies because offenses carry ≥10 years; weighs for detention	Dibee contends he can rebut presumption with evidence of rehabilitation and ties	Presumption applies; defendant rebutted it but presumption remains an evidentiary factor (Hir)
Whether Dibee is a danger to the community	Government relies on violent nature of alleged past offenses to show danger	Dibee points to two decades without violent conduct and post-offense rehabilitation	Court: government failed to prove dangerousness by clear and convincing evidence; not shown to be dangerous
Whether Dibee is a flight risk and can be released on conditions	Government: clandestine flight and long avoidance show high flight risk, no conditions will assure appearance	Dibee: community ties, residence with sister, rehabilitation, employment history support appearance	Court: government met burden by preponderance; detention continued as no conditions reasonably assure appearance

United States v. Koenig, 912 F.2d 1190 (9th Cir. 1990) (de novo review of magistrate detention orders)
United States v. Gebro, 948 F.2d 1118 (9th Cir. 1991) (government burdens for flight risk and dangerousness on pretrial detention)
United States v. Hir, 517 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir. 2008) (rebuttable presumption remains as an evidentiary finding to be weighed with § 3142(g) factors)
United States v. Dominguez, 783 F.2d 702 (7th Cir. 1986) (presumption in favor of detention persists after rebuttal as a factor against release)