United States v. Raymond Twine

344 F.3d 987, 2003 Daily Journal DAR 10760, 2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8562, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 19429, 2003 WL 22155549
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 19, 2003
Docket03-10393
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 344 F.3d 987 (United States v. Raymond Twine) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth 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. Raymond Twine, 344 F.3d 987, 2003 Daily Journal DAR 10760, 2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8562, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 19429, 2003 WL 22155549 (9th Cir. 2003).

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Defendant-Appellant Raymond Twine (“Twine”), charged with felon in possession of a firearm pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), appeals the district court’s pretrial detention order holding him without bail.

The district court held that the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142, authorizes Twine’s pretrial detention without bail on the sole basis of a finding of dangerousness to the community. The district court alternatively held that felon in possession of a firearm is a crime of violence, and that this finding triggers the Act’s express authority to hold Twine without bail pending trial after a hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f). The district court also affirmed the magistrate judge’s finding of dangerousness to the community.

We are not persuaded that the Bail Reform Act authorizes pretrial detention without bail based solely on a finding of dangerousness. This interpretation of the Act would render meaningless 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(1) and (2). Our interpretation is in accord with our sister circuits who have ruled on this issue. See United States v. Byrd, 969 F.2d 106 (6th Cir.1992); United States v. Ploof, 851 F.2d 7 (1st Cir.1988); United States v. Himler, 797 F.2d 156 (3d Cir.1986).

There is a circuit split, and there are arguments both in support of and against the conclusion that felon in possession of a *988 firearm is a crime of violence. See United States v. Lane, 252 F.3d 905 (7th Cir.2001); United States v. Dillard, 214 F.3d 88 (2d Cir.2000); United States v. Singleton, 182 F.3d 7 (D.C.Cir.1999). However, we are bound by our holding in United States v. Canon, 993 F.2d 1439, 1441 (9th Cir.1993). Consistent with Canon, we hold that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) — felon in possession of a firearm — is not a crime of violence for purposes of the Bail Reform Act.

The detention order is reversed and the case remanded to the district court to establish appropriate conditions of release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142. 1

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

1

. Twine's evidentiary challenges, besides not having been raised in the district court, have been mooted by our remand for a new hearing to establish appropriate conditions of release.

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

Related

United States v. Gray
529 F. Supp. 2d 177 (D. Massachusetts, 2007)
United States v. Megahed
519 F. Supp. 2d 1236 (M.D. Florida, 2007)
United States v. Montoya
486 F. Supp. 2d 996 (D. Arizona, 2007)
United States v. Gentry
455 F. Supp. 2d 1018 (D. Arizona, 2006)
United States v. Dustin Leroy Ingle
454 F.3d 1082 (Tenth Circuit, 2006)
United States v. Ingle
Tenth Circuit, 2006
United States v. Green
414 F. Supp. 2d 1029 (N.D. Oklahoma, 2006)
United States v. Allen
409 F. Supp. 2d 622 (D. Maryland, 2006)
United States v. Powers
318 F. Supp. 2d 339 (W.D. Virginia, 2004)
United States v. Moncrief
289 F. Supp. 2d 1311 (M.D. Alabama, 2003)
United States v. Jamal
285 F. Supp. 2d 1221 (D. Arizona, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
344 F.3d 987, 2003 Daily Journal DAR 10760, 2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8562, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 19429, 2003 WL 22155549, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-raymond-twine-ca9-2003.