U.S. v. WHITFIELD, 00-00413-01-CR-W-HFS. (2013)
Court: District Court, W.D. Missouri
Number: infdco20130802936
Visitors: 12
Filed: Aug. 01, 2013
Latest Update: Aug. 01, 2013
Summary: MEMORANDUM TO COUNSEL AND PROBATION OFFICE HOWARD F. SACHS, District Judge. My understanding of the mental condition report from Warden Sanders would be that there is no basis for federal institutional custody. Assuming the Government acquiesces, the choices would appear to be four: (1) further standardized supervised release, (2) further punishment if conditions are violated, (3) institutionalization by the State, unless medication is accepted that would permit release, or (4) unconditional r
Summary: MEMORANDUM TO COUNSEL AND PROBATION OFFICE HOWARD F. SACHS, District Judge. My understanding of the mental condition report from Warden Sanders would be that there is no basis for federal institutional custody. Assuming the Government acquiesces, the choices would appear to be four: (1) further standardized supervised release, (2) further punishment if conditions are violated, (3) institutionalization by the State, unless medication is accepted that would permit release, or (4) unconditional re..
More
MEMORANDUM TO COUNSEL AND PROBATION OFFICE
HOWARD F. SACHS, District Judge.
My understanding of the mental condition report from Warden Sanders would be that there is no basis for federal institutional custody. Assuming the Government acquiesces, the choices would appear to be four: (1) further standardized supervised release, (2) further punishment if conditions are violated, (3) institutionalization by the State, unless medication is accepted that would permit release, or (4) unconditional release to the streets. My impression is that none of the choices is desirable or feasible except perhaps the third choice. The Probation Office is requested to explore the options, particularly the third one. Prompt disposition seems required, as indefinite federal detention seems unauthorized.
Source: Leagle
