United States v. Jose Tormos-Vega

First Circuit

United States v. Jose Tormos-Vega

907 F.2d 215, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 10893, 1990 WL 90395

CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit

DecidedJune 28, 1990

Docket88-2235

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 907 F.2d 215 (United States v. Jose Tormos-Vega) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Jose Tormos-Vega, 907 F.2d 215, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 10893, 1990 WL 90395 (1st Cir. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

*216 ORDER OF COURT

Upon consideration of defendant’s motion for stay pending appeal and in view of this court’s granting of an en banc hearing in United States v. Martinez-Torres, No. 87-2006, a case in which, as here, a magistrate had presided over jury selection, and of the closeness of that issue, we are satisfied that the instant appeal “is not for the purpose of delay and raises a substantial question of law or fact likely to result in reversal or an order for a new trial.” 18 U.S.C. § 3143.

We, therefore, direct the district court forthwith to determine whether defendant has demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that he is not likely to flee and does not pose a danger to the safety of any other person or the community. If the district court so finds, it should order the release of defendant pending appeal in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3142(b) or (c), as provided in 18 U.S.C. § 3143(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

*216 ORDER OF COURT

Upon consideration of defendant’s motion for stay pending appeal and in view of this court’s granting of an en banc hearing in United States v. Martinez-Torres, No. 87-2006, a case in which, as here, a magistrate had presided over jury selection, and of the closeness of that issue, we are satisfied that the instant appeal “is not for the purpose of delay and raises a substantial question of law or fact likely to result in reversal or an order for a new trial.” 18 U.S.C. § 3143.

We, therefore, direct the district court forthwith to determine whether defendant has demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that he is not likely to flee and does not pose a danger to the safety of any other person or the community. If the district court so finds, it should order the release of defendant pending appeal in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3142(b) or (c), as provided in 18 U.S.C. § 3143(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

907 F.2d 215, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 10893, 1990 WL 90395, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-jose-tormos-vega-ca1-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack