UNITED STATES
v.
BONAVIA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the defendant, convicted of illegal firearm possession and facing other serious charges, failed to meet the burden of proving he was not a flight risk or danger to the community, and thus his bond would not be reinstated.
Following a jury conviction for illegal firearm possession by a convicted felon, the defendant's bond was revoked and a hearing was ordered to determi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Flight Risk Assessment cases and more on FLexlaw
At the hearing on the motion to quash, the defendant sought, by calling the United States Attorney to the stand, to ascertain the names of the witnesses examined by the Grand Jury and offered to prove by subsequent testimony that the witnesses examined could not have produced any competent evidence to justify defendant’s indictment. Counsel for the Government objected to the examination of the United States Attorney as to the names of the witnesses appearing before the Grand Jury and this objection was sustained. Thereupon, counsel for the defendant introduced letters exchanged between himself and the United States Attorney in which the latter refused, upon request, to furnish defendant with the names of the witnesses who appeared before the Grand Jury and then rested.
This being the state of the record, it is obvious that defendant has produced no evidence to support his motion to quash and the same must be dismissed.
Although there is undoubtedly considerable merit in the reasons relied upon by the Government in its motion to strike, in view of the conclusion reached with reference to the motion to quash, it is unnecessary to pass upon the questions raised by the Government’s motion to strike,
The motion of the defendant to quash the indictment is denied,