REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON PETITION FOR WARRANT FOR OFFENDER UNDER SUPERVISION
ZACK HAWTHORN, Magistrate Judge.
Pending is a "Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender Under Supervision" filed July 5, 2018, alleging that the Defendant, Quentin Gerald Spikes, violated his conditions of supervised release. This matter is referred to the undersigned United States magistrate judge for review, hearing, and submission of a report with recommended findings of fact and conclusions of law. See United States v. Rodriguez, 23 F.3d 919, 920 n.1 (5th Cir. 1994); see also 18 U.S.C. § 3401(i) (2000); E.D. Tex. Crim. R. CR-59.
I. The Original Conviction and Sentence
Quentin Gerald Spikes was sentenced on April 20, 2015, before The Honorable Ron Clark, of the Eastern District of Texas, after pleading guilty to the offense of Felon in Possession, a Class C felony. This offense carried a statutory maximum imprisonment term of 10 years. The guideline imprisonment range, based on a total offense level of 12 and a criminal history category of VI, was 30 to 37 months. Quentin Gerald Spikes was subsequently sentenced to 36 months' imprisonment followed by a 3 year term of supervised release subject to the standard conditions of release, plus special conditions to include drug aftercare, mental health aftercare, obtain a GED, and a $100 special assessment.
II. The Period of Supervision
On June 14, 2017, Spikes completed his period of imprisonment and began service of the supervision term. On December 19, 2017, the term of supervised release was revoked and Spikes was sentenced to 6 months' imprisonment followed by 30 months supervised release.
III. The Petition
United States Probation filed the Petition for Warrant for Offender Under Supervision raising five allegations. The petition alleges that Quentin Gerald Spikes violated the following conditions of release:
Allegation 1. The Defendant must report to the probation office in the district to which the defendant is released within 72 hours of release from the custody of the Bureau of Prisons.
Allegation 2. The Defendant shall not unlawfully possess a controlled substance. The defendant shall refrain from any unlawful use of a controlled substance. The defendant shall submit to one drug test within 15 days of release from imprisonment and at least two periodic drug tests thereafter, as determined by the Court.
Allegation 3. The Defendant shall notify the probation officer ten days prior to any change of residence or employment.
Allegation 4. The Defendant shall permit a probation officer to visit at any time at home or elsewhere and shall permit confiscation of any contraband observed in plain view by the probation officer.
Allegation 5. The Defendant shall participate in a program of testing and treatment for drug abuse, under the guidance and direction of U.S. Probation, until such time as the defendant is released from the program by the probation officer.
IV. Proceedings
On October 2, 2018, the undersigned convened a hearing pursuant to Rule 32.1 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to hear evidence and arguments on whether the Defendant violated conditions of supervised release, and the appropriate course of action for any such violations.
At the revocation hearing, counsel for the Government and the Defendant announced an agreement as to a recommended disposition regarding the revocation. The Defendant agreed to plead "true" to the fifth allegation that claimed he failed to participate in a program of testing and treatment for drug abuse, under the guidance and direction of U.S. Probation, until such time as the defendant is released from the program by the probation officer. In return, the parties agreed that he should serve a term of imprisonment of 8 months' imprisonment, with an eighteen (18) month term of supervised release to follow.
V. Principles of Analysis
According to Title 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), the court may revoke a term of supervised release and require the defendant to serve in prison all or part of the term of supervised release authorized by statute for the offense that resulted in such term of supervised release without credit for time previously served on post-release supervision, if the court, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure applicable to revocation of probation or supervised release, finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant violated a condition of supervised release, except that a defendant whose term is revoked under this paragraph may not be required to serve on any such revocation more than five years in prison if the offense that resulted in the term of supervised release is a Class A felony, more than three years if such offense is a Class B felony, more than two years in prison if such offense is a Class C or D felony, or more than one year in any other case. The original offense of conviction was a Class C felony, therefore, the maximum imprisonment sentence is 2 years.
According to U.S.S.G. § 7B1.1(a)1, if the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the Defendant violated conditions of supervision by failing to participate in a program of testing and treatment for drug abuse, under the guidance and direction of U.S. Probation, until such time as the defendant is released from the program by the probation officer, the Defendant will be guilty of committing a Grade C violation. U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(a)(2) indicates that upon a finding of a Grade C violation, the court may (A) revoke probation or supervised release; or (B) extend the term of probation or supervised release and/or modify the conditions of supervision.
U.S.S.G. § 7B1.4(a) provides that in the case of revocation of supervised release based on a Grade C violation and a criminal history category of VI, the policy statement imprisonment range is 8 to 14 months.
According to U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(c)(2), where the minimum term of imprisonment determined under U.S.S.G. § 7B1.4 is more than six months but not more than ten months, the minimum term may be satisfied by (A) a sentence of imprisonment; or (B) a sentence of imprisonment that includes a term of supervised release with a condition that substitutes community confinement or home detention according to the schedule in U.S.S.G. § 5C1.1(e), provided that at least one-half of the minimum term is satisfied by imprisonment.
According to U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(f) any term of imprisonment imposed upon revocation of probation or supervised release shall be ordered to be served consecutively to any sentence of imprisonment that the defendant is serving, whether or not the sentence of imprisonment being served resulted from the conduct that is the basis of the revocation of probation or supervised release.
According to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(h), when a term of supervised release is revoked and the defendant is required to serve a term of imprisonment, the court may include a requirement that the defendant be placed on a term of supervised release after imprisonment. The length of such a term of supervised release shall not exceed the term of supervised release authorized by statute for the offense that resulted in the original term of supervised release, less any term of imprisonment that was imposed upon revocation of supervised release. The authorized term of supervised release for this offense is not more than 3 years.
U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(g)(2) indicates where supervised release is revoked and the term of imprisonment imposed is less than the maximum term of imprisonment imposable upon revocation, the court may include a requirement that the defendant be placed on a term of supervised release upon release from imprisonment. The length of such a term of supervised release shall not exceed the term of supervised release authorized by statute for the offense that resulted in the original term of supervised release, less any term of imprisonment that was imposed upon revocation of supervised release.
In determining the Defendant's sentence, the court shall consider:
1. The nature and circumstance of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant; see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1);
2. The need for the sentence imposed: to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct; to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and to provide the Defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, other corrective treatment in the most effective manner; see 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553 (a)(2)(B)-(D);
3. Applicable guidelines and policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission, for the appropriate application of the provisions when modifying or revoking supervised release pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 994(a)(3), that are in effect on the date the defendant is sentenced; see 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(4); see also 28 U.S.C. § 924(A)(3);
4. Any pertinent policy statement issued by the Sentencing Commission, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 994(a)(2), that is in effect on the date the defendant is sentenced; see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(5); and
5. The need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct; see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6).
6. The need to provide restitution to any victims of the offense.
18 U.S.C. §§ 3583(e) and 3553(a).
VI. Application
The Defendant pled "true" to the petition's allegation that he violated a special condition of release that he failed to participate in a program of testing and treatment for drug abuse, under the guidance and direction of U.S. Probation, until such time as the defendant is released from the program by the probation officer. Based upon the Defendant's plea of "true" to this allegation of the Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender Under Supervision and U.S.S.G. § 7B1.1(a), the undersigned finds that the Defendant violated a condition of supervised release.
The undersigned has carefully considered each of the factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e). The Defendant's violation is a Grade C violation, and the criminal history category is VI. The policy statement range in the Guidelines Manual is 8 to 14 months. The Defendant did not comply with the conditions of supervision and has demonstrated an unwillingness to adhere to conditions of supervision.
Consequently, incarceration appropriately addresses the Defendant's violation. The sentencing objectives of punishment, deterrence and rehabilitation along with the aforementioned statutory sentencing factors will best be served by a prison sentence of 8 months, with an eighteen (18) month term of supervised release to follow.
VII. Recommendations
The court should find that the Defendant violated the allegation in the petition that he violated a special condition of release by failing to participate in a program of testing and treatment for drug abuse, under the guidance and direction of U.S. Probation, until such time as the defendant is released from the program by the probation officer. The petition should be granted and the Defendant's supervised release should be revoked pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583. The Defendant should be sentenced to a term of 8 months' imprisonment, with an eighteen (18) month term of supervised release to follow.
In addition to the mandatory and standard conditions of supervised release, the same special conditions previously imposed by Judge Clark shall be imposed, including: drug aftercare; mental health aftercare, and obtain a GED. The rationale for these special conditions is contained in the Defendant's Presentence Investigation Report, including, his history of substance abuse, positive urine specimen as alleged in the petition, and his history of mental health history as discussed in the Presentence Investigation Report.
VIII. Objections
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c), each party to this action has the right to file objections to this report and recommendation. Objections to this report must: (1) be in writing, (2) specifically identify those findings or recommendations to which the party objects, and (3) be served and filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of this report, and (4) no more than eight (8) pages in length. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c) (2009); FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2); Local Rule CV-72(c). A party who objects to this report is entitled to a de novo determination by the United States District Judge of those proposed findings and recommendations to which a specific objection is timely made. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (2009); FED R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3).
A party's failure to file specific, written objections to the proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law contained in this report, within fourteen (14) days of being served with a copy of this report, bars that party from: (1) entitlement to de novo review by the United States District Judge of the findings of fact and conclusions of law, see Rodriguez v. Bowen, 857 F.2d 275, 276-77 (5th Cir. 1988), and (2) appellate review, except on grounds of plain error, of any such findings of fact and conclusions of law accepted by the United States District Judge, see Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1428-29 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
