United States v. Voog
702 F. App'x 692
| 10th Cir. | 2017Background
- March 3, 2017 traffic stop in Washington City, Utah; Voog gave a false name and DOB and officers found his ID, a firearm, ammunition, and drug-related items in the vehicle.
- Indicted on one count of felon in possession of a firearm/ammunition (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)) and three counts of unlawful possession of controlled substances (methamphetamine, heroin, marijuana).
- Magistrate judge ordered detention pending trial; district court conducted de novo review and again ordered detention.
- District court weighed § 3142(g) factors: (1) nature of offenses (firearm + controlled substances) — favored detention; (2) weight of evidence — probable cause and strong circumstantial evidence favored detention.
- Court found Voog has a significant criminal history involving weapons and narcotics, is unemployed, homeless, has long-standing methamphetamine addiction, and a history of non-appearance and false identification — factors favoring detention.
- Court concluded Voog poses a flight risk and a danger to the community (danger construed broadly to include risk of further criminal activity); Tenth Circuit affirmed on de novo review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether detention pending trial was appropriate under the Bail Reform Act (§ 3142(e)) | Government argued detention proper because no conditions would reasonably assure appearance and community safety given charges and history | Voog argued factors weighed against detention: evidence is circumstantial; no history of violence; claims ability to secure employment/housing on release | Affirmed: court properly applied § 3142(g) factors and found detention necessary for appearance and community safety |
| Weight of the evidence factor | Government: indictment and strong circumstantial evidence support detention | Voog: evidence is circumstantial and should weigh against detention | Held for government: probable cause and strong circumstantial evidence weighed in favor of detention |
| Defendant’s history/characteristics (criminal record, substance abuse, ties) | Government: prior convictions for weapons/narcotics, homelessness, unemployment, daily meth use, history of non-compliance support detention | Voog: acknowledged addiction/homelessness but claimed he could obtain employment and housing immediately if released | Held for government: history and characteristics weighed in favor of detention |
| Danger to community and flight risk | Government: combination of firearms and drugs plus prior conduct shows danger to community and risk of flight/noncompliance | Voog: no history of violence; drug history is addiction not violent conduct | Held for government: danger construed broadly; combination of drugs and firearms justified detention |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Cisneros, 328 F.3d 610 (10th Cir. 2003) (standard of review: de novo review of mixed questions and clear-error review of factual findings in detention appeals)
- United States v. Cook, 880 F.2d 1158 (10th Cir. 1989) (community safety factor construed broadly to include risk of further criminal activity rather than only physical violence)