Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. Sales, 2:14-00219. (2019)

Court: District Court, S.D. West Virginia Number: infdco20190109c24 Visitors: 6
Filed: Jan. 07, 2019
Latest Update: Jan. 07, 2019
Summary: SUPERVISED RELEASE REVOCATION AND JUDGMENT ORDER MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JOHN T. COPENHAVER, JR. , Senior District Judge . On December 20, 2018, the United States of America appeared by Jennifer Rada Herrald, Assistant United States Attorney, and the defendant, William Leon Sales, appeared in person and by his counsel, Mary Lou Newberger, for a hearing on the petition seeking revocation of supervised release submitted by United States Probation Officer M. Dylan Shaffer. The defendant
More

SUPERVISED RELEASE REVOCATION AND JUDGMENT ORDER MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

On December 20, 2018, the United States of America appeared by Jennifer Rada Herrald, Assistant United States Attorney, and the defendant, William Leon Sales, appeared in person and by his counsel, Mary Lou Newberger, for a hearing on the petition seeking revocation of supervised release submitted by United States Probation Officer M. Dylan Shaffer. The defendant commenced a 28-month term of supervised release in this action on June 11, 2018, as more fully set forth in the Supervised Release Revocation and Judgment Order entered by the court on April 12, 2018.

The court heard the admissions of the defendant and the representations and argument of counsel.

For reasons noted on the record of this proceeding, which are ORDERED incorporated herein by reference, the court found by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant has violated the conditions of supervised release in the following respect: the defendant failed to abide by the special condition that he, commencing immediately upon his release from imprisonment, participate in and successfully complete the 9 to 12 month residential program at Recovery Point inasmuch as he entered the program on June 11, 2018, and was discharged prior to completion on June 22, 2018, after he left the program on his own accord, thereby rendering his whereabouts unknown; all as admitted by the defendant on the record of the hearing and all as set forth in the petition on supervised release.

And the court finding, as more fully set forth on the record of the hearing, that the violation warrants revocation of supervised release and, further, that it would unduly depreciate the seriousness of the violation if supervised release were not revoked, it is ORDERED that the supervised release previously imposed upon the defendant in this action be, and it hereby is, revoked.

And the court having complied with the requirements of Rule 32(a)(1)(B) and (C) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and finding, after considering the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e), that the defendant should be confined to the extent set forth below, it is accordingly ORDERED that the defendant be, and he hereby is, committed to the custody of the United States Bureau of Prisons for imprisonment for a period of TWELVE MONTHS AND ONE DAY.

The defendant was remanded to the custody of the United States Marshal.

The Clerk is directed to forward copies of this written opinion and order to the defendant, all counsel of record, the United States Probation Department, and the United States Marshal.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer