United States v. Muhtorov
702 F. App'x 694
| 10th Cir. | 2017Background
- Jamshid Muhtorov, a 2007 Uzbek refugee, was indicted for conspiracy and attempt to provide material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization (IJU) in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2339B; arrested in January 2012 while boarding a one-way flight to Turkey with cash and electronic devices.
- Government intercepted year-long communications showing Muhtorov’s expressed allegiance to the IJU, discussions of providing funds/equipment, references to martyrdom, and plans to attend a madrassa in Turkey; his phone contained extremist videos and IED instructions.
- Muhtorov was detained continuously since 2012; he filed three motions for pretrial release (2012, 2015, 2017); district court denied the first two but granted release in June 2017 subject to strict conditions (ankle GPS, home confinement except limited exceptions, passport surrendered, electronics restricted).
- Release followed new proceedings under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(2) after dismissal of two indictment counts and three evidentiary hearings (suppression, James, Daubert) that the district court said weakened the government’s case.
- The Government appealed the June 23, 2017 order; the Tenth Circuit stayed the release and, reviewing de novo, reversed—ordering Muhtorov detained pending trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether district court properly considered and applied the statutory rebuttable presumption of detention under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e) | Government: district court failed to make specific findings that Muhtorov rebutted the presumption and did not give it proper weight | Muhtorov: court was aware of and addressed the presumption; cited changed circumstances and hearings that rebutted it | Court: district court did consider the presumption, but its ultimate release decision understated the presumption’s significance and was incorrect |
| Whether the § 3142(g) factors (especially weight of evidence and dangerousness) supported release | Government: weight of evidence, arrest facts, statements, and materials show strong case and clear/dangerous intent; presumption remains | Muhtorov: three hearings revealed translation and evidentiary weaknesses, IJU did not accept him, and family/community ties mitigate risk | Court: district court erred in overvaluing perceived evidentiary weaknesses and undervaluing steps showing intent; government proved flight risk and danger (preponderance and clear-and-convincing standards) |
| Whether the specific release conditions could reasonably assure appearance and community safety | Government: even strict conditions insufficient given foreign travel intent, resources, and violent rhetoric | Muhtorov: strict GPS/home confinement/electronic monitoring and surrendered passport mitigate risks | Court: conditions would not reasonably assure safety or appearance; detention required |
| Whether the district court’s factual findings were clearly erroneous | Muhtorov: findings about weaker evidence and stronger ties were supported by hearings | Government: many findings misapprehended significance of communications and actions | Court: no clear error in many factual findings, but the district court misapplied their significance when granting release |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Stricklin, 932 F.2d 1353 (10th Cir. 1991) (defendant must produce some evidence to rebut presumption; burden of persuasion remains with government)
- United States v. Cisneros, 328 F.3d 610 (10th Cir. 2003) (government must prove risk of flight by preponderance and dangerousness by clear and convincing evidence)
- United States v. Gilgert, 314 F.3d 506 (10th Cir. 2002) (standard for clear-error review of factual findings)
- United States v. Cook, 880 F.2d 1158 (10th Cir. 1989) (district court may err if it ignores statutory presumption in release/detention determinations)