MICHAEL G. NAVILLE, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the undersigned U.S. Magistrate Judge pursuant to the Order entered by the Honorable Sarah Evans Barker, U.S. District Court Judge, on February 4, 2014, designating the Magistrate Judge to conduct a hearing on the Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender Under Supervision filed with the Court on February 3, 2014, and the subsequent Supplemental Petition for Warrant for Offender Under Supervision filed on March 14, 2014, and to submit to Judge Barker proposed Findings of Facts and Recommendations for disposition under Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 3401(i) and 3583(e) and (g). An Initial Hearing on the Petition filed on February 3, 2014 and the Supplemental Petition filed on March 14, 2014 in this matter was held on March 20, 2014. The Initial Hearing on the Second Supplemental Petition filed on April 8, 2014 was held on April 9, 2014 and disposition proceedings were held on April 29, 2014. All the hearings in this matter were held in accordance with Rule 32.1 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and 18 U.S.C. § 3583. At the Initial Hearing on March 20, 2014, the defendant, Robert Carl Wilson, appeared in person with his appointed, Larry Simon. The government appeared by Doris Pryor, Assistant United States Attorney, via telephone, for Steven DeBrota, Assistant United States Attorney. U.S. Probation appeared by Tasha Taylor, who participated in the proceedings.
The following procedures occurred in accordance with Rule 32.1 Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and 18 U.S.C. § 3583:
1. On March 20, 2014, Larry Simon was present for the initial hearing and was appointed by the Court to represent Mr. Wilson regarding the pending Petition for Warrant on Offender Under Supervision and the Supplemental Petition for Warrant on Offender Under Supervision.
2. A copy of the Petition on Offender Under Supervision and Supplemental Petition on Offender Under Supervision were provided to Mr. Wilson and his counsel who informed the Court that they had read and understood the specifications of each alleged violation and waived further reading thereof.
3. Mr. Wilson was advised of his right to a preliminary hearing and its purpose in regard to the alleged specified violations of his supervised release contained in the pending Petition and Supplemental Petition.
4. Mr. Wilson was informed that he would have the right to question witnesses against him at the preliminary hearing unless the Court, for good cause shown, found that justice did not require the appearance of a witness or witnesses.
5. Mr. Wilson was advised he had the opportunity to appear at the preliminary hearing and present evidence on his own behalf.
6. Mr. Wilson was informed that, if the preliminary hearing resulted in a finding of probable cause that Mr. Wilson had violated an alleged condition or conditions of his supervised release set forth in the Petition and/or Supplemental Petition, he would be held for a revocation hearing before the undersigned Magistrate Judge, in accordance with Judge Baker's designations entered on February 4, 2014 and March 14, 2014, respectively.
7. Mr. Wilson requested a preliminary examination, but waived his right to a detention hearing at that time. He further reserved the right to request a detention hearing at a later date if the situation so warranted the same. The Preliminary Hearing was scheduled for April 9, 2014, at 3:30 p.m.
8. The parties requested the violation hearing be held in conjunction with the preliminary examination, as much of the evidence to be presented was the same. The Court granted such request and set all the matters for April 9, 2014 at 3:30 p.m. The defendant was ordered detained pending further proceedings before the Court.
9. On April 8, 2014, the U.S. Probation Office filed a Second Supplemental Petition for Warrant for Offender Under Supervision, and on April 9, 2014, District Judge Barker designated the undersigned to conduct the hearing on the Second Supplemental Petition in conjunction with the Petition for Warrant filed on February 3, 2014 and the Supplemental Petition for Warrant filed on March 14, 2014 and to submit to District Judge Barker proposed findings of fact and recommendations for disposition under 18 U.S.C. 3583(e).
10. On April 9, 2014, Mr. Wilson appeared with CJA counsel, Larry Simon, at the scheduled preliminary examination and violation hearings. The Government was represented by Assistant United States Attorney Zachary Myers and U.S. Probation Officer Tasha Taylor also participated in the proceedings.
11. At that time the parties agreed to continue the Preliminary Examination and Revocation hearing to a date when all three pending Petitions could be considered. The Court then proceeded to conduct an Initial Hearing with respect to the Second Supplemental Petition for Warrant on Offender Under Supervision filed on April 8, 2014.
12. A copy of the Second Supplemental Petition on Offender Under Supervision was provided to Mr. Wilson and his counsel who informed the Court that they had read and understood the specifications of each alleged violation and waived further reading thereof.
13. Mr. Wilson was advised of his right to a preliminary hearing and its purpose in regard to the alleged specified violations of his supervised release contained in the pending Second Supplemental Petition.
14. Mr. Wilson was informed that he would have the right to question witnesses against him at the preliminary hearing unless the Court, for good cause shown, found that justice did not require the appearance of a witness or witnesses.
15. Mr. Wilson was advised he had the opportunity to appear at the preliminary hearing and present evidence on his own behalf.
16. Mr. Wilson was informed that, if the preliminary hearing resulted in a finding of probable cause that Mr. Wilson had violated an alleged condition or conditions of his supervised release set forth in the Second Supplemental Petition, he would be held for a revocation hearing before the undersigned Magistrate Judge, in accordance with Judge Baker's designations entered on February 4, 2014 and March 14, 2014 and April 9, 2014, respectively.
17. Mr. Wilson requested a preliminary examination on the Second Supplemental Petition. As the parties had previously requested the violation hearing be held in conjunction with the preliminary examination, and continued to request the same with regard to the Second Supplemental Petition, the Court granted such request and set this case for a Preliminary Examination and Revocation Hearing with regard to all three Petitions for April 29, 2014 at 2:00 p.m. The defendant was ordered detained pending further proceedings before the Court.
18. On April 29, 2014, Mr. Wilson appeared in person and with his appointed counsel, Larry Simon. The Government appeared by AUSA Steven DeBrota. U.S. Probation Officer Tasha Taylor also participated in the proceedings.
19. The Government orally moved to dismiss Violations No. 2 and 13 and the same was granted by the Court. The Government and Defendant stated their readiness to proceed with the Revocation Hearing.
20. The Government presented the testimony of U.S. Probation Officer Tasha Taylor. Government's Exhibit 1 was marked and admitted without objection. Defense counsel cross-examined the witness. The Government also presented the testimony of Deputy U.S. Marshal Kevin Ferran, and Defense counsel cross-examined the witness. The Defendant offered no witnesses.
21. The parties presented their respective arguments regarding the appropriate sanction for Mr. Wilson, if the Court found that Mr. Wilson had violations the conditions of his supervised release.
22. The Court took judicial notice of all substantive papers and pleadings in the Clerk's file in this cause. The Court further took the matter under advisement and advised the parties it would issue a written ruling on the same.
23. Based on the information available to the Court, the Court finds as follows:
24. The Court finds the testimony and the exhibit admitted in the hearing clearly and convincingly have proven the alleged violations as set forth in the Petitions as follows:
25. Based on the information available to the Court, the Court further finds the following:
The Court, having heard the evidence, and the arguments and discussions of behalf of each of the parties, and having made the above findings, now
The Magistrate Judge requests that Tasha Taylor, U.S. Probation Officer, prepare for submission to the Honorable Sarah Evans Barker, District Judge, as soon as practicable, a supervised release revocation judgment, in accordance with these findings of fact, conclusions of law and recommendations.
The parties are hereby notified that the District Court may reconsider any matter assigned to the Magistrate Judge, including this Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, pursuant to Title 28, U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and (C) and Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. You shall have 10 days after being served a copy of this Report and Recommendation to serve and file written objections to the proposed findings of facts and conclusions of law and recommendations of this Magistrate Judge. If written objections to the Magistrate Judge's proposed findings of fact and recommendations are made, the District Judge will make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which an objection is made.
