`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
`Criminal No. 23-160-24 (NEB/JFD)
`
`
`UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
`
`v.
`
`MARON BAILEY
`a/k/a Boonie,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR
`TEMPORARY RELEASE
`
`On October 20, 2023, Defendant Maron Bailey moved for a temporary release
`
`from custody to attend the birth of his first child. ECF No. 428. Although
`
`sympathetic to Bailey’s circumstance, it does not mitigate the various factors that
`
`resulted in his pretrial detention because his release posed a risk of nonappearance
`
`and danger to the community. See ECF No. 228. (Order of Detention.) The
`
`government respectfully requests that the defendant’s motion be denied.
`
`Procedural Background
`
`
`
`On April 26, 2023, a grand jury in the District of Minnesota returned an
`
`indictment against Bailey and 24 others alleging a RICO conspiracy. ECF No. 1. The
`
`indictment specifically alleged that each defendant, including Bailey, was a member
`
`of the “Highs” criminal organization and that the organization’s members had
`
`engaged in various violent acts. Id. On May 8, 2023, the Court ordered Bailey
`
`detained pending trial because he posed a risk of nonappearance and a danger to the
`
`community. ECF No. 228. Specifically, the Court found that Bailey had a history of
`
`substance abuse, an unstable living condition, and fled police during apprehension
`
`
`
`CASE 0:23-cr-00160-NEB-JFD Doc. 430 Filed 10/26/23 Page 2 of 3
`
`efforts on this indictment. Id. The Court also determined that pretrial release would
`
`pose a danger to the community. Bailey has a prior conviction that involved
`
`discharging a firearm during a drug transaction, a pending Wisconsin state case
`
`involving weapon and drug-related charges, and had 175 fentanyl pills on his person
`
`when law enforcement apprehended him. Bailey also self-identified as affiliated with
`
`a local gang. On October 5, 2023, Bailey pleaded guilty to a criminal information.
`
`ECF No. 421. Bailey admitted his long-standing ties with the “Highs” criminal
`
`organization, which included dealing large amounts of fentanyl as recently as
`
`January 2023. As a result, Bailey is pending sentencing and facing a significant
`
`custodial sentence. On October 20, 2023, Bailey moved for temporary release to
`
`attend the birth of his first child.
`
`Argument
`
`Bailey seeks temporary release to witness the birth of his first child and
`
`indicates he would agree to “any and all measures . . . to ensure the security of him
`
`doing so.” ECF No. 428 at 2. But no such measures would appear to adequately
`
`mitigate the risks that resulted in Bailey’s pretrial detention.1 It remains that Bailey
`
`has an unstable living situation, apparent struggles with chemical dependency,
`
`and—when last released—an active gang affiliation. Unfortunately, the timing of
`
`Bailey’s admitted criminal behavior also directly overlaps with the pregnancy of the
`
`child he now hopes to witness being born. This is relevant only because it undercuts
`
`
`USPPS could not propose any workable release conditions and recommended
`1
`Bailey’s pretrial detention.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`CASE 0:23-cr-00160-NEB-JFD Doc. 430 Filed 10/26/23 Page 3 of 3
`
`an argument that the realities of fatherhood somehow tempered his otherwise
`
`concerning behaviors. Moreover, Bailey now faces the realities of a significant
`
`criminal sentence, which only heightens the risks of a potential temporary release.
`
`Conclusion
`
`
`
`Accordingly, although sympathetic to the nature of the request, the
`
`government opposes Bailey’s motion for temporary release. Such a release—even if
`
`temporary—poses a risk of nonappearance and danger to the community.
`
`Dated: October 26, 2023
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`ANDREW M. LUGER
`United States Attorney
`
`/s/ Jordan L. Sing
`
`BY: JORDAN L. SING
`Assistant U.S. Attorney
`
`3
`
`

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ ChargeStill Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site