UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
v. ) Criminal Action No. 15-152-05 (RMC)
)
BRIAN BRYANT (5), )
)
Defendant. )
)
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On February 17, 2017, a jury found Defendant Brian Bryant guilty of several
charges, including conspiracy and aggravated identity theft. Following the jury’s verdict, the
Court heard argument concerning the detention of Brian Bryant and his codefendants pending
sentencing. See Tr. of 2/17/17 Hearing (Tr.) [Dkt. 218]. The Court determined that Brian
Bryant should be detained. Id. 12:19-13:6. Brian Bryant now moves for release pending his
sentencing, see Def.’s Mot. for Release Pending Sentencing (Mot.) [Dkt. 249], which the
Government opposes, see Gov’t’s Opp’n [Dkt. 250]. Upon consideration of the parties’ motions,
the Court denies Brian Bryant’s motion.
18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(1) (2012) provides that the Court
shall order that a person who has been found guilty of an offense
and who is awaiting imposition or execution of sentence . . . be
detained, unless the judicial officer finds by clear and convincing
evidence that the person is not likely to flee or pose a danger to the
safety of any other person or the community if released . . . .
To overcome the presumption that the Court “shall” detain defendants pending sentencing, Mr.
Bryant must provide “clear and convincing” evidence that he is not likely to flee or pose a
danger to the community.
To meet this burden, Brian Bryant points to his strong ties to the local community,
his history of complying with his prior terms of release, and his information that a cooperating
witness does not believe Brian Bryant poses a threat to her. See Mot. at 1-2. This information
does not rise to the level necessary to establish “clear and convincing evidence” that Mr. Bryant
is not likely to flee or pose a danger to the community. Mr. Bryant’s ties to the community, and
behavior while on supervised release, were as true on February 17, 2017 as they are today. Mr.
Bryant still faces a considerable prison sentence which serves as a strong incentive to flee.
Further, as the Court ruled in February, “there is this concern also about the safety and situation
of [the cooperating witness] with the potential for threats for a boiling up of anger now that the
verdicts have been reached and declared.” Tr. 12:22-25. That concern still exists, even if the
cooperating witness does not currently feel threatened. In short, Mr. Bryant’s arguments do not
constitute sufficiently new or material information to convince the Court to reconsider its earlier
ruling, and the risks that existed in February exist just as strongly today.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, it is hereby
ORDERED that Defendant Brian Bryant’s Motion for Release from Custody
Pending Sentencing [Dkt. 249] be DENIED.
Date: October 19, 2017 /s/
ROSEMARY M. COLLYER
United States District Judge