United States District Court, D. Nevada
AMENDED ORDER 
M. NAVARRO, CHIEF JUDGE.
before the Court is Defendant Albert Lopez's
(“Defendant”) Motion to Modify Conditions of
Release, (ECF No. 1567). The Government filed a Response,
(ECF No. 1584), and Defendant did not file a reply.
Bail Reform Act guides courts in fashioning acceptable
conditions of pretrial release. See 18 U.S.C. §
3142. Section 3142 requires judicial officers to impose the
least restrictive release conditions that will
“reasonably assure the appearance of the person as
required and the safety of any other person and the
community.” 18 U.S.C. § 3142(c)(1)(B); see
also United States v. Gebro, 948 F.2d 1118, 1121 (9th
Cir. 1991). The factors to be considered in determining
whether there are appropriate conditions of release that
further these aims include: (1) the nature and seriousness of
the offense charged, (2) the weight of the evidence, (3) the
defendant's character, physical and mental condition,
family and community ties, past conduct, history relating to
drugs and alcohol abuse, and criminal history, and (4) the
nature and seriousness of the danger to another person or the
community posed by defendant's release. 18 U.S.C. §
3142(g). Pursuant to Section 3142(c)(3), the Court “may
at any time amend the order to impose additional or different
conditions of release.” The party requesting
modification must “establish that new information
exists that was not known to him or her at the time of the
initial detention hearing, and that this new information is
material to his or her release conditions regarding flight or
dangerousness.” United States v. Wei Seng
Phua, No. 2:14-cr-00249-APG, 2015 WL 127715, at *1 (D.
Nev. Jan. 8, 2015); see 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f).
Defendant seeks to modify his pretrial release conditions
which currently impose a daily curfew of 9:00 p.m. to 4:00
a.m. “or as directed by [Pretrial Services].”
(Property Bond, ECF No. 798); (see Mot. to Modify
1:15-24, ECF No. 1567); (see also Mins. of
Proceedings, Condition No. 12, ECF No. 795). Defendant
explains that his work schedule “often changes from
day-to-day, ” and his shifts are often from 12:00 a.m.
to 8:00 a.m. (Mot. to Modify 2:3-5). As such, Defendant's
curfew creates difficulty for Pretrial Services.
(Id. 2:5-8). Defendant requests that his curfew be
eliminated, but that the pretrial release condition requiring
his 24hour GPS monitoring remain in place. (See Id.
1:15-19). Defendant further submits that he has been on
pretrial release since August 2018 without incident.
(Id. 1:19-21). Pretrial Services does not oppose
Defendant's Motion. (See Id. 2:8-13).
Response, the Government contends that “removing the
curfew altogether eliminates all structural support for GPS
monitoring. If [Defendant] is not required to be at a certain
place during a certain time, it begs the question as to the
effectiveness of monitoring his location.” (Resp.
4:4-6, ECF No. 1584). Alternatively, the Government
“has no objection to modifying the curfew condition to
permit [Defendant] to work as scheduled without pre-approval
by pretrial services.” (Id. 4:7-9).
Court does not agree with the Government's representation
that removing Defendant's curfew would eliminate all
structural support for GPS monitoring. Indeed, GPS monitoring
ensures that, inter alia, Defendant is in compliance
with his current travel restrictions. Moreover, it is unclear
how the Government's alternative modification would
resolve the conflict between Defendant's ever-changing
work schedule and his current curfew.
light of the foregoing, and Pretrial Services'
non-opposition to the removal of Defendant's curfew, the
Court GRANTS Defendant's Motion to
Modify Conditions of Release. The following are
Defendant's current terms of pretrial release as modified
by this Order:
1. The defendant shall report to U.S. Pretrial Services for
2. The defendant shall surrender any passport and/or passport
card to U.S. Pretrial Services or the supervising officer.
3. The defendant shall not obtain a passport or passport
4. Travel is restricted to the state of California and Clark
County, Nevada for the purpose of court purposes and attorney
meetings. Pretrial services will have approval to permit the
defendant's travel outside of these locations with prior
notice from the defendant.
5. The defendant shall avoid all contact directly or
indirectly with any person who is or may become a victim or
potential witness in the investigation or prosecution of the
6. The defendant shall avoid all contact directly or
indirectly with co-defendants unless it is in the presence of
7. The defendant shall refrain from possessing a firearm,
destructive device, or any ...