Filed: Sep. 10, 2014
Latest Update: Sep. 10, 2014
Summary: ORDER JOE B. BROWN, Magistrate Judge. The Magistrate Judge initially convened a detention, and if necessary, a probably cause hearing in this matter as the result of warrant issued for his arrest for violating his conditions of probation. At the hearing there was some question as to whether the Defendant had already had a detention hearing in Detroit. The records were not clear on this matter and my efforts to contact the Magistrate Judge who conducted the hearing, apparently at the Defendan
Summary: ORDER JOE B. BROWN, Magistrate Judge. The Magistrate Judge initially convened a detention, and if necessary, a probably cause hearing in this matter as the result of warrant issued for his arrest for violating his conditions of probation. At the hearing there was some question as to whether the Defendant had already had a detention hearing in Detroit. The records were not clear on this matter and my efforts to contact the Magistrate Judge who conducted the hearing, apparently at the Defendant..
More
ORDER
JOE B. BROWN, Magistrate Judge.
The Magistrate Judge initially convened a detention, and if necessary, a probably cause hearing in this matter as the result of warrant issued for his arrest for violating his conditions of probation.
At the hearing there was some question as to whether the Defendant had already had a detention hearing in Detroit. The records were not clear on this matter and my efforts to contact the Magistrate Judge who conducted the hearing, apparently at the Defendant's hospital room in Detroit, were not successful.
The parties also advised that they were trying to work out a "global settlement" in this matter. As a result, the hearing was continued from the morning September 8, 2014, and when the parties did not advise the Magistrate Judge that they had resolved the matter, it was reset for the hearing on September 9, 2014.
At the hearing on September 9, 2014, the Magistrate Judge decided, because of the confusion over whether a detention hearing had been conducted in Detroit, to conduct a detention hearing. The parties advised at the beginning of the hearing that they had nothing further to add about a "global settlement."
After hearing testimony from Probation Officer Donna Jackson and a proffer from the Defendant, the Magistrate Judge decided to contact Chief Judge Haynes in order to find out what had occurred in connection with the global settlement. Chief Judge Haynes advised that there was a motion to set the case for expedited hearing on revocation of probation, but the motion listed Magistrate Judge Bryant as the Judge.
After explaining the present situation to Chief Judge Haynes he advised that he would conduct a revocation of probation hearing forthwith. The parties were directed to report to Judge Haynes' courtroom and further proceedings were terminated before the undersigned.
It now appears that Chief Judge Haynes has conducted such a hearing and found that the Defendant's probation should be revoked and he was sentenced to time served (Docket Entry 141).
Accordingly, the proceedings before the undersigned are TERMINATED.
It is so ORDERED.
