USA v. Drane et al

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
JASHON WALKER,
Defendant.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Case No. 3:24-cr-43-4
Judge Thomas M. Rose
______________________________________________________________________________
ENTRY AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION ON
DEFENDANT’S PRETRIAL DETENTION (DOC. NO. 305)
______________________________________________________________________________
This case is currently before the Court on Defendant Jashon Walker’s (“Walker”) Motion
for Reconsideration on Defendant’s Pretrial Detention (the “Motion”) (Doc. No. 305). Walker has
been indicted on criminal charges related to a complex alleged conspiracy to traffic dangerous
narcotics, including fentanyl and methamphetamine. (Doc. No. 89 at PageID 252-60.) Since first
being first being arrested on May 2, 2024 (see Doc. No. 29), Walker has remained detained pending
trial on the charges against him. 	(See Doc. Nos. 33 and 52.) 	Walker filed the instant Motion
seeking release from detention and the Court subsequently heard argument on December 16, 2025,
where six character letters written on Walker’s behalf and certificates of completion for a variety
of prison programs were admitted without objection. The Court also admitted, without objection,
the Government’s exhibit, consisting of a series of photographs taken at Walker’s home when
executing the principal search warrant in this case. The Court took the matter under advisement
and, after consideration, finds it most appropriate to DENY Walker’s Motion.
Generally, defendants charged with certain decidedly dangerous offenses—such as the
Case: 3:24-cr-00043-TMR Doc #: 312 Filed: 12/18/25 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>

2
offenses charged here1 —shall be subject to a rebuttable presumption in favor of pretrial detention.
18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(3). 	To rebut this presumption, a defendant “must introduce at least some
evidence” that he is neither a flight risk nor a danger to the community. U.S. v. Stone, 608 F.3d
939, 945 (6th Cir. 2010).
At bar, Walker has produced at least some evidence, but that evidence does not actually
tend to rebut the presumption in favor of pretrial detention. To that end, the Court finds Walker
to be a flight risk if released from detention pending trial. Walker has previously failed to appear
for court on ten separate occasions. (Doc. No. 41 at PageID 85.) Irrespective of what those court
dates were for, Walker’s consistent failure to appear demonstrates both a lack of respect for the
law and a disregard for court orders. Additionally, Walker’s local family ties do not assuage the
Court’s concern on this front. 	Importantly, a not insignificant portion of Walker’s local family
members are his co-defendants in this case.
On balance, Walker seems to be engaged in a good faith effort to convince the Court that
he does not pose a risk of danger to the community and the Court certainly appreciates his
rehabilitative efforts. Nevertheless, the Court finds the Government’s argument in this regard to
be persuasive and, in any event, Walker’s failure to rebut the presumption that he poses a flight
risk is dispositive of his request for release pending trial.
Therefore, 	the 	Court 	hereby 	DENIES 	Walker’s 	Motion 	for 	Reconsideration 	on
Defendant’s Pretrial Detention (Doc. No. 305).
DONE and ORDERED in Dayton, Ohio, this Thursday, December 18, 2025.
s/Thomas M. Rose
________________________________
THOMAS M. ROSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
1 Walker has conceded that his case carries a presumption in favor of pretrial detention under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e).
Case: 3:24-cr-00043-TMR Doc #: 312 Filed: 12/18/25 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>