United States’ Supplement In Support of Motion for Detention/ - 3 Dickson Lee, CR14-024RAJ
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 prongs, § 3142(g) requires the court to take into account four statutory factors: (1) the nature and circumstances of the offense charged; (2) the weight of the evidence against the person; (3) the history and characteristics of the person, including his character, physical and mental condition, family ties, employment, financial resources, length of residence in the community, community ties, past conduct, history, and record concerning appearance at court proceedings; and (4) the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or community that would be posed by the person’s release. The burden of proof rests with the Government which must establish risk of flight by a preponderance of the evidence, and risk to others and the community by clear and convincing evidence.
United States v. Motamedi
, 767 F.2d 1403, 1405 (9th Cir, 1985).
A. Dickson Lee Poses a Serious Risk of Flight.
Dickson Lee is charged with offenses that carry substantial penalties, including jail time. Lee has no incentive to remain in the United States and substantial means available to permanently flee the country. Lee’s willingness to mislead Pretrial Services, and by extension, this Court, with respect to his ties to Taiwan are indicative of how far he is willing to go to obtain release. At the time of initial appearance, Lee acknowledged to Pretrial that he travelled frequently to China, but pointed to homes he owned in the Seattle area as evidence of ties to this District. Lee also stated that he had certain bank accounts overseas, but provided no details as to the amount and extent of foreign assets. No one to date has come forward on Lee’s behalf with any details regarding Lee’s foreign assets in spite of Pretrial requests. When asked about family ties in the area, Lee disclosed one adult child in the Boston area, and siblings in other parts of the United States. Lee’s information to Pretrial is misleading, designed to hide the extent of his true ties to Taiwan, the amount of assets he maintains overseas, and the superficial nature of his connection to this District. First, there is a basic conflict of information regarding where in the United States Lee maintains a residence, if at all. Even though Lee
Case 2:14-cr-00024-RAJ Document 9 Filed 04/01/14 Page 3 of 9