A federal magistrate judge has denied bond to a woman indicted for operating a Ponzi scheme which cheated investors out of $2.11 million. Her lawyer has filed a motion with the court to reconsider releasing her on bond.
The Macon Telegraph has the story.
Saundra McKinney Pyles, 52, was indicted on five counts of mail fraud and five counts of money laundering for her alleged involvement in a Ponzi scheme. Today, she sits in jail after Magistrate Judge Leon Barfield refused to grant her a bond. Her lawyer argues that Barfield erred in denying bond, and that the court should grant bond upon a motion to reconsider.
Under federal law, it is within the power of a magistrate judge to grant or deny bond. At a bond hearing, the judge may release the defendant on his or her own recognizance, set conditions for bond, deny bond, or temporarily detain the defendant to allow for proceedings such as deportation. A defendant may be released on his or her own recognizance unless the judge determines that such release will not reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant at future court dates or that such release will endanger the safety of other persons.
A defendant who is not released on his own recognizance may still be released subject to various conditions such as reporting to law enforcement and avoiding contact with victims and witnesses. The judge is directed to impose conditions so as to assure the return of the defendant as well as the safety of others. For some crimes, the government may move the court to determine if such conditions can carry out the goals of return and safety. This occurs when a defendant has committed certain violent offenses, crimes which carry life imprisonment or death, certain offenses under the Controlled Substances Act, any felony if the person has been convicted of two or more specific offenses, and certain felonies that involve a minor victim, possession of a firearm or destructive device, or the failure to register. When a person has been convicted of these crimes, it generally gives rise to a presumption that he will not appear in court and is not safe to be released in the community. The government or court may also hold a hearing to see if any conditions will be effective in cases involving a serious risk that the defendant will flee, obstruct justice, or threaten, injure, or intimidate a prospective witness or juror. It is also presumed that no condition will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant and the safety of others for certain offenses under the Controlled Substances Act, various violent acts, and acts involving minor victims.
In determining whether there are conditions of release which will assure appearance and safety, the judge must take into account the nature and circumstances of the offense charged, the weight of evidence against the person, the history and characteristics of the person, and the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or the community that would be posed by the defendant’s release. If the judge finds that no conditions for the crime alleged will reasonably assure the defendant’s appearance at future proceedings and the safety of others, he may order the detention of the defendant before trial.
In Pyles’ case, the court found that Pyles represents a serious risk to obstruct justice or to intimidate witnesses when it denied her bond. Pyles’ attorney argues that such a determination is erroneous, since there is no evidence to suggest she represents a threat to anyone. However, an FBI agent testified that Pyles violated conditions of her bond by calling family, potential witnesses, and alleged victims. Yet, the FBI agent also testified that family members initiated some of the calls, and that none of the family members expressed any fear of Pyles. In addition, only three or four phone calls were placed to family members and one of those was to a mentally ill member.
Aside from detaining Pyles until trial, the court could put her under house arrest, give her a security bond, or impose travel restrictions.
Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for people charged with serious crimes. We have successfully represented clients facing serious federal criminal charges and state criminal charges in courts across Georgia. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine. Page Pate was recently the Chairman of the Criminal Law Section of the Atlanta Bar Association.