United States v. Perez, 4:21-cr-01724

Arrested June 22, 2021 at DeConcini Port of Entry; charged with importation of heroin (21 U.S.C. §§952, 960).
Initially detained, then released on personal recognizance bond with a condition requiring residential drug treatment; completed a 90‑day program at Community Bridges.
Pretrial Services filed a petition to revoke after multiple violations: failure to report, failure to report for intake, and a urine test positive for methamphetamine, fentanyl, THC, and alcohol; warrant issued and defendant arrested.
At the admit/deny hearing defendant admitted to the drug-use violation and admitted avoiding PTS to evade testing; Magistrate Judge Ferraro revoked release and ordered detention.
Defendant moved for review seeking placement/screening for residential treatment; the Government did not oppose screening but reserved the right to argue for detention.
After de novo review the district court affirmed detention, finding defendant unlikely to abide by conditions given deceptive evasion, admitted substance use, and criminal history; the court did not rely on a separate DUI arrest.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether revocation and detention under 18 U.S.C. §3148 is warranted because defendant is unlikely to abide by release conditions	Government supported revocation/detention (reserved right to argue detention)	Perez argued placement in residential treatment would assure compliance and permit release	Court affirmed revocation/detention: defendant unlikely to abide by any condition; treatment placement insufficient given deception, admitted drug use, and prior record

United States v. Koenig, 912 F.2d 1190 (9th Cir. 1990) (de novo review of a magistrate judge's detention order)
United States v. Reynolds, 956 F.2d 192 (9th Cir. 1992) (discussing use of 18 U.S.C. § 3148 for revocation/detention after release-condition violations)