1UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTEASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGANSOUTHERN DIVISIONUNITED STATES OF AMERICA,Plaintiff, CRIMINAL NO. 08-20458-vs- HON. PAUL D. BORMANHON. DONALD A. SCHEERD-1 MOHAMMED MUSTAPHA ALI MASFAKA,a/k/a Mohammad Masfaka,a/k/a Mohamad Rateb,a/k/a Abu Ratib,a/k/a Abu Rateb,Defendant._________________________________________/
GOVERNMENT’S WRITTEN PROFFER IN SUPPORTOF ITS REQUEST FOR DETENTION PENDING TRIAL
The United States of America, by Mark Jebson, Special Assistant United StatesAttorney, hereby proffers the following information, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142 (f),
insupport of its request that defendant be detained pending trial:1.
On December 3, 2008, defendant Mohammed Masfaka (Masfaka), wasindicted by a federal grand jury for False Statements to a Federal Agency (the FBI), inviolation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a), Attempted Naturalization Fraud, in violation of 18U.S.C. § 1425(a), and Perjury During a Naturalization Proceeding, in violation of 18
Although the government plans to submit a government witness at defendant’sdetention hearing, it will also present some evidence by proffer. Submitting evidence byproffer is permitted by 18 U.S.C. §3142(f). It is also recognized by the courts as acommon way to present evidence in the pre-trial context.
United States v.Winsor
, 785 F.2d 755, 756 (6th Cir. 1986) (holding that the government may proceed in adetention hearing by proffer or hearsay);
United States v. Abuhamra
, 389 F.3d 309, 321n. 7 (2nd Cir. 2004) (“[F]ew detention hearings involve live testimony or crossexamination. Most proceed on proffers.”).
Case 2:08-cr-20458-PDB-DAS Document 9 Filed 01/28/2010 Page 1 of 13