Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. De Godoy Buzaneli

United States District Court, D. Minnesota

December 15, 2017

United States of America, Plaintiff,
v.
Antonio Carlos De Godoy Buzaneli, Defendant.

          Kimberly A. Svendsen and Joseph H. Thompson, Assistant United States Attorneys, Counsel for Plaintiff.

          Daniel M. Scott, Kelley, Wolter & Scott, P.A., Counsel for Defendant.

          ORDER

          Michael J. Davis United States District Court

         I. Introduction

         The Defendant has been charged in the Indictment with one count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349 and twelve counts of mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 and 2. The Defendant was arrested in the Southern District of Florida, and at his initial appearance, the government moved for detention pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(1) arguing the Defendant posed a flight risk. The government's motion was granted and the Defendant was detained. The Defendant was thereafter transferred to the District of Minnesota, and appeared before Magistrate Judge Menendez on December 7, 2017. Based on the previous detention order issued in the Southern District of Florida, Magistrate Judge Menendez held that the Defendant be detained.

         Now before the Court is the Defendant's motion to revoke the Order for detention.

         II. Standard

         A defendant may be detained pending trial if the Court finds there is no “condition or combination of conditions . . . [that] will reasonably assure the appearance of such person as required and the safety of any other person and the community.” 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(1).

         Detention is appropriate where the government proves by clear and convincing evidence that the Defendant is a danger to others or to the community, or when the government proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the Defendant is a risk of flight, and that in either case, there are no conditions or combination of conditions that will assure the safety of the community or the Defendant's appearance at future court proceedings.

         In making the determination as to whether detention is warranted, the Court must take into account the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g).

         When reviewing a Magistrate Judge's decision as to detention, this Court conducts a de novo review. United States v. Maull, 773 F.2d 1479, 1484-85 (8th Cir. 1985).

         III. Discussion

         The Court has conducted a de novo review of the record and finds that the government has demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that the Defendant is a risk of flight, and that there are no conditions or combination of conditions that will assure the Defendant's appearance at future court proceedings.

         The Defendant has been charged with numerous counts of fraud that each carry a statutory maximum sentence of 20 years. The Indictment describes a Ponzi scheme that operated between the years 2009 and 2016, during which time the Defendant and others defrauded investors of approximately $150 million. The government proffers that the weight of the evidence is strong, and is expected to include the testimony of a co-conspirator that has already pleaded guilty to conspiring with the Defendant to defraud investors in Providence. The guideline range could be as high as life in prison, based on a total offense level The Defendant's history and characteristics weigh in favor of detention. He was born in Brazil and holds both Brazilian and Italian passports. His adult daughter lives in Brazil and at the time of his arrest, his wife was in Brazil. He is a frequent, international traveler, and the government asserts $14 ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.