United States v. Riggs, 3:18-cr-00240

In April 2018 DHS received an Australian tip about a West Virginia-based website hosting sexually explicit images, including 26 files of a nude 13-year-old girl filmed in a bathroom shower.
Agent Fleener identified Scott Riggs as the uploader; Riggs admitted producing and posting the minor’s images using a hidden phone under a cabinet and admitted posting other explicit images of family members without their knowledge.
A federal grand jury indicted Riggs on production and distribution of child pornography (18 U.S.C. §§ 2251(a), 2252A(a)(2)); he was arrested and detained pending trial by Magistrate Judge Eifert.
Riggs moved to revoke the detention order and be released on bond; the district court conducted a de novo review of the detention record (no new exculpatory evidence warranted a hearing).
The court found the statutory rebuttable presumption of detention was rebutted by two character witnesses but retained evidentiary weight; the court weighed statutory factors (nature of offense, weight of evidence, history/character, danger).
The court concluded by clear and convincing evidence that no conditions would reasonably assure community safety and denied the motion to revoke detention.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the magistrate’s detention order should be revoked	Govt: Probable cause, danger to community due to nature of offense and strong evidence supports detention	Riggs: Rebut presumption with character testimony; proposes release on bond and electronic monitoring	Denied — de novo review upholds detention; no conditions will assure community safety
Effect of rebuttable presumption under §3142(e)(3)	Govt: Presumption applies because offense involves a minor and child-porn statutes	Riggs: Offered some evidence (two witnesses) to rebut presumption	Rebuttal met but presumption retains evidentiary weight and favors detention
Weight of the evidence against defendant	Govt: Strong — IP identification, admissions, identification of victim, filming location established	Riggs: Challenges portability of some online posts as exculpatory; no new evidence presented	Court: Evidence is strong and weighs in favor of detention
Whether conditions (custody by wife, electronic monitoring, home restrictions) can mitigate danger	Govt: Proposed conditions insufficient given pattern of boundary violations, wife’s limited supervision, victim’s access	Riggs: Wife would serve as custodian, restrict internet access, home suitable for monitoring	Court: Conditions inadequate — risk to minors in household and community remains; detention ordered

United States v. Stewart, [citation="19 F. App'x 46"] (4th Cir. 2001) (district court reviews magistrate’s detention order de novo)
United States v. Jessup, 757 F.2d 378 (1st Cir. 1985) (defendant need only produce some evidence to rebut detention presumption; rebutted presumption retains evidentiary weight)