USA v. Meera Sachdeva, No. 11-60639 (5th Cir. 2011)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 11-60639 Document: 00511644721 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/25/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 11-60639 Summary Calendar October 25, 2011 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. MEERA SACHDEVA, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 3:11-CR-65-1 Before BENAVIDES, STEWART, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Meera Sachdeva appeals the district court s order affirming the magistrate judge s pretrial detention order. The district court determined that no condition or combination of conditions would reasonably assure Sachdeva s presence at trial. A judicial officer may order a defendant detained pending trial if the officer finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the person. * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. Case: 11-60639 Document: 00511644721 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/25/2011 No. 11-60639 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e), (f); see United States v. Fortna, 769 F.2d 243, 250 (5th Cir. 1985). Absent an error of law, we will uphold a district court s pretrial detention order if it is supported by the proceedings in that court, a deferential standard of review that equates to an abuse of discretion standard. United States v. Rueben, 974 F.2d 580, 586 (5th Cir. 1992). The district court s determination that the Government had shown by a preponderance of the evidence that no condition or combination of conditions could reasonably assure Sachdeva s presence at trial is supported by the record. See § 3142; United States v. Westbrook, 780 F.2d 1185, 1189-90 (5th Cir. 1986). Accordingly, the pretrial detention order is AFFIRMED. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.