United States v. Price, 4:24-cr-00565

Lyndell Leroy Price was indicted on charges of conspiracy to commit arson, arson, and conspiracy to use an interstate facility to commit arson in the Southern District of Texas.
The charged offenses stem from Price orchestrating the arson of a restaurant owned by his business partner, allegedly motivated by revenge after being excluded from a new business venture.
Price has a prior felony conviction for arson and was on supervised release for federal income tax fraud at the time of these new alleged offenses.
The Government presented evidence, including credible testimony from an FBI Special Agent and corroborating phone records, showing Price's participation in and leadership of the arson conspiracy.
Weapons including firearms and a flamethrower were found in Price’s possession, which he is prohibited from having as a felon.
The court held a detention hearing under the Bail Reform Act and determined whether any conditions of release could reasonably assure community safety and Price’s appearance at trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Presumption of detention for dangerousness	Price’s history and new offense require detention	Price has community, family, business ties and no flight history	Presumption not rebutted; detention ordered
Flight Risk	Price is a flight risk due to assets and means	Price has deep community and financial ties, no prior flight	Not a flight risk; ties outweigh Government’s concerns
Danger to Community	Arson, threats, prior convictions, weapon possession show danger	Bonds and supervision are enough, cooperation shown in past	Danger proven by clear and convincing evidence
Conditions of Release	No set of conditions can ensure safety	Supervised release and monitoring suffice	No conditions or combination could ensure safety

United States v. Dominguez, 783 F.2d 702 (7th Cir. 1986) (explains what evidence may rebut presumption of detention)
United States v. Stone, 608 F.3d 939 (6th Cir. 2010) (addresses Congressional intent regarding detention presumption)
United States v. Hare, 872 F.2d 796 (5th Cir. 1989) (explains continued weight of presumption even if rebutted)