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. Leiva

United States District Court, Central District of Illinois, Springfield Division

May 15, 2015

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
PAVEL LEIVA, Defendant.

OPINION

RICHARD MILLS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

The Defendant moves for release pending appeal.

The Government objects.

The motion is Denied.

I.

On May 27, 2014, following a jury trial, Defendant Pavel Leiva was convicted of one count of conspiracy to commit access device fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(1) and (b)(2) and one count of possessing a counterfeit access device, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(3) and (c)(1)(A)(i).

On April 10, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to serve concurrent terms of 60 months imprisonment on Count 1 and 82 months imprisonment on Count 2; followed by two years of supervised release on each count, running concurrently; a $200 special assessment; and $3797.48 in restitution. The Defendant was permitted to remain on bond and ordered to report to the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) when directed. On April 29, 2015, the Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal.

The Defendant’s Motion states that on April 29, 2015, he received notice that he is to report to Correctional Institution D. Ray James in Folkston, Georgia for service of sentence on May 26, 2015. The Defendant states that this correctional institution is a private facility run by a private corporation rather than the BOP and, therefore, he will not be provided the same opportunities for education and rehabilitation as inmates housed in BOP facilities.

II. The Bail Reform Act of 1984 provides that a defendant is to be incarcerated after sentencing unless the Court finds:

(A) 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 . . . and
(B) that the appeal is not for the purposes of delay and raises a substantial question of law or fact likely to result in –
(i) reversal,
(ii) an order for a new trial,
(iii) a sentence that does not include a term of imprisonment, or (iv) a reduced sentence to a term of imprisonment less than the total of the time already served plus ...

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.