United States v. Nicholson
United States v. Nicholson
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________ ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) v. ) Criminal No. 19-0205 (PLF) ) DANTE NICHOLSON, ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________)
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendant Dante Nicholson’s (1) Motion for
Reconsideration of Bond or Temporary Release under Severe Restrictions upon Eventual
Sentencing [Dkt. No. 35]; and (2) Motion for Temporary Release Due to Pandemic [Dkt.
No. 37]. The government opposes both motions. See Government’s Opposition to Defendant’s
Request for Review of Order of Detention [Dkt. No. 38]. Largely for the reasons set forth in the
government’s opposition, the Court will deny the motions.
On July 30, 2019, the defendant, Dante Nicholson, entered a plea to a one-count
Information [Dkt. No. 21], charging him with production of child pornography, in violation of
18 U.S.C. § 2251(a). The Statement of Offense [Dkt. No. 24] that accompanied the plea sets
forth the conduct in which Mr. Nicholson acknowledges he engaged. As he also acknowledged
at the time of the plea hearing, this offense is subject to a statutory mandatory minimum of
fifteen years, meaning the Court must sentence Mr. Nicholson to at least fifteen years in prison.
Furthermore, Mr. Nicholson was on probation at the time he committed the instant offense. No sentencing date has yet been set because of a change of defense counsel and limited
opportunities for defendants at the D.C. Jail to meet with their counsel via video.
Mr. Nicholson asks that he be temporarily released from the D.C. Jail/CTF due to
the pandemic and that he be placed on house arrest at his mother’s house in the District of
Columbia with electronic monitoring. He says he is at increased risk for COVID-19 due to
hypertension and obesity. Indeed, Mr. Nicholson once tested positive for COVID-19, but did not
experience any of the typical symptoms; so – as he acknowledges – the positive test may not
have been accurate. Furthermore, the D.C. Jail reports that there currently are no positive cases
of COVID-19 at the D.C. Jail or CTF.
The government opposes Mr. Nicholson’s motions for reasons with which the
Court largely agrees. The facts of this case are especially egregious, and the Court has no
confidence that Mr. Nicholson would not be a danger to persons in the community if he were
released. See
18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(3). And it surely cannot find by clear and convincing
evidence that he is not likely to pose a danger if released.
18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(2)(b). Even if
possible, home confinement with electronic monitoring would not be an adequate protection
because much of Mr. Nicholson’s criminal conduct in this case was internet-based and was
apparently committed from home. Further, defendant was on probation at the time he committed
the offense in question. In these circumstances, it would be very difficult for Pretrial Services to
adequately monitor him on home confinement.
Rather than grant the motions, the Court urges counsel to promptly file comments
and objections to the draft Presentence Investigation Report, so it can be finalized, and then to
file their own sentencing memoranda. The Court thereafter will promptly schedule the matter for
sentencing. For these reasons, it is hereby
2 ORDERED that defendant’s (1) Motion for Reconsideration of Bond or
Temporary Release under Severe Restrictions upon Eventual Sentencing [Dkt. No. 35], and
(2) Motion for Temporary Release Due to Pandemic [Dkt. No. 37] are DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
___/s/_________________________ PAUL L. FRIEDMAN United States District Judge DATE: June 26, 2020
3
Reference
- Status
- Published