Reported / Citable
Background
Lola Shalewa Barbara Kasali was indicted on two counts of making false statements to a financial institution and two counts of bank fraud arising from an alleged scheme involving more than $3.8 million. After her arrest at an airport while departing the country, she was released on an unsecured bond subject to conditions that included electronic monitoring and residence with her father as third-party custodian.
The court later revoked Kasali’s bond under 18 U.S.C. § 3148(b)(2)(B) after repeated violations. The record showed that she failed to report for installation of her GPS monitor, did not follow Pretrial Services’ instructions, avoided communications, tampered with or failed to charge the monitoring device, lived with her mother instead of her approved custodian, and refused to substantiate a claimed COVID-19 infection. She then sought reconsideration, asserting that asthma and her unvaccinated status increased her health risks at the Federal Detention Center in Houston and that release would permit face-to-face meetings with counsel.
The Court’s Holding
The court denied reconsideration under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(2)(B). It explained that Kasali had not originally received a detention hearing because the government agreed to her initial release, making that provision an uncertain fit. Even assuming it applied, generalized COVID-19 concerns and an unsupported asthma assertion were not new material information bearing on whether release conditions would reasonably assure her appearance. Nothing in the motion altered the earlier conclusion that she was unlikely to comply with any condition or combination of conditions.
The court also denied temporary release under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(i). Applying a four-factor analysis, it found that Kasali’s history of noncompliance favored detention; she supplied no medical proof or details showing moderate or severe asthma; her unvaccinated status was voluntary because vaccines were available at the facility; and she offered no concrete release plan addressing supervision or COVID-19 risks. Release could also increase risks to Pretrial Services personnel because her prior refusal to communicate remotely could require in-person supervision. Finally, face-to-face access to counsel might be convenient, but Kasali did not show that release was necessary to prepare her defense.
Key Takeaways
- Generalized fear of contracting COVID-19, without individualized medical evidence, did not justify reopening the release issue or granting temporary release.
- A defendant seeking temporary release under § 3142(i) must show a compelling reason and explain why release is necessary, including through a concrete plan addressing supervision and health risks.
- Kasali’s repeated violations of bond conditions and failure to show that she would comply if released weighed heavily against reconsideration.
Why It Matters
The order illustrates that COVID-19 concerns do not displace the Bail Reform Act’s individualized inquiry. A detained defendant seeking release on health grounds must substantiate the claimed medical vulnerability, connect it to conditions at the detention facility, and propose a workable release arrangement.
It also underscores that temporary release for defense preparation requires necessity, not merely a preference for more convenient or face-to-face attorney meetings.