Judge Denies Clare Bronfman’s Release Pending Appeal
Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis did not spend much time deliberating over Clare Bronfman’s bail motion.
Submitted yesterday, Bronfman sought to be released from
prison pending appeal of her 81 month sentence. As ordered, the prosecution
responded by 12:00 noon today, and the judge issued his Order before 1:00 PM
denying her request:
The judge ruled: …. The Defendant remains a flight risk, who
now has even greater incentive to flee after being sentenced; the Defendant has
not identified a “substantial question of law or fact likely to result in… a
reduced sentence to a term of imprisonment … and the Defendant has not offered
a compelling reason for the court to reconsider its conclusion made at
sentencing that a custodial sentence is warranted in spite of the COVID-19
pandemic. The court has reviewed Defendant’s remaining arguments and finds them
meritless. Accordingly, Defendant’s motion is DENIED. Ordered by Judge Nicholas
G. Garaufis on 10/16/2020.
This means that Bronfman, who is now serving day 17 of a
2,464 days sentence, will remain at the Brooklyn Metropolitan Detention Center
until assigned a permanent prison.
In its response to Bronfman’s motion, the prosecution wrote
Bronfman “poses a substantial risk of flight. As she acknowledges, she has
‘significant foreign ties, including family members in England and France, and
property in Fiji’ … along with access to vast wealth…. This Court recognized
that she posed a significant risk of flight under the more forgiving standard
set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3142 when it granted her release on a $100 million
bond, secured with $50 million in assets.
“The defendant’s incentive to flee has increased
significantly following the Court’s imposition of a term of 81 months’
imprisonment….
“Her assertion that she ‘intends to demonstrate’ that the
Court erred in imposing sentence in light of the sentences imposed in other
cases involving ‘similar, non-violent crimes’ borders on the frivolous….
“Finally, the defendant has failed to direct the Court’s
attention to any case, or to the conduct of any defendant, that is factually
similar to the defendant’s conduct in this case. As set forth at length in the
Court’s sentencing memorandum, the defendant’s ‘criminal conduct places her in
an altogether different category from other defendants who are convicted of the
same offenses, and therefore her circumstances defy easy comparison.’
“Finally, the defendant offers no reason for the Court to
revisit its conclusion that ‘[n]either [the defendant]’s age nor health
condition . . . place her in the category of high-risk individuals…. Her assertion that she is currently
incarcerated in a ‘facility that potentially has many positive diagnoses for
COVID-19’ is …. refuted by data made available by the Bureau of Prisons… As of the date of this letter, the
Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, New York has no active cases of
COVID-19 among inmates….”
Comments
Post a Comment