Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Sitz, 4:04CR84 ALM/KPJ. (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. Texas Number: infdco20190828e42 Visitors: 23
Filed: Aug. 06, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 06, 2019
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE KIMBERLY C. PRIEST JOHNSON , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is the Government's request for revocation of Defendant's supervised release. After the District Court referred the matter to this Court for a report and recommendation, the Court conducted a hearing on August 5, 2019, to determine whether Defendant violated his supervised release. Defendant was represented by Denise Benson. The Government was represented by
More

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pending before the Court is the Government's request for revocation of Defendant's supervised release. After the District Court referred the matter to this Court for a report and recommendation, the Court conducted a hearing on August 5, 2019, to determine whether Defendant violated his supervised release. Defendant was represented by Denise Benson. The Government was represented by Matt Johnson.

On May 17, 2005, Defendant was sentenced by the Honorable Amos Mazzant, United States District Judge, to a sentence of one hundred eighty-eight (188) months imprisonment followed by a five (5) year term of supervised release for the violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), Felon in Possession of a Firearm.

On July 23, 2019, the U.S. Probation Officer filed a Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender under Supervision (the "Petition") (Dkt. 71). The Petition asserts that Defendant violated the following conditions of supervision: (1) Defendant shall not commit another federal, state, or local crime; (2) Defendant shall report to the probation officer and shall submit a truthful and complete written report within the first five days of each month; (3) Defendant shall notify the probation officer at least ten days prior to any change in residence or employment; (4) Defendant shall notify the probation officer within seventy-two hours of being arrested or questioned by a law enforcement officer; (5) under the guidance and direction of the United States Probation Office, Defendant shall participate in a program of psychiatric and mental heath services and shall comply with any medication requirements as prescribed by the treatment provider; and (6) Defendant must reside in a residential reetry center or similar facility, in a community corrections component, for a period of one hundred and eighty days to commence immediately upon release, and must abide by the rules and regulations of the center. The Petition asserts that Defendant violated these conditions because: (1) on May 2, 2019, in Smith County, Texas, Defendant was convicted of Theft of Property Greater Than or Equal to $100 but Less Than $750; (2) on August 24, 2018, Defendant failed to report to his probation officer as directed; (3) Defendant failed to submit a monthly written report for the months of April 2018, May 2018, December 2018, March 2019, June 2019, and July 2019; (4) on April 4, 2019, Defendant failed to notify his probation officer at least ten days prior to changing his residence; (5) on January 2, 2019, Defendant failed to notify his probation officer within seventy-two hours of having contact with law enforcement; (6) on May 1, 2018, Defendant failed to comply with his medication requirements as prescribed by the treatment provider; (7) Defendant failed to attend his mental health counseling appointments in December 2018; and (9) on July 12, 2019, Defendant was unsuccessfully discharged from the residential reentry center. See Dkt. 71.

At the hearing, Defendant entered a plea of true to violation of allegations one through six (1-6). Defendant waived his right to allocute before the district judge and his right to object to the report and recommendation of this Court. The Court finds that Defendant has violated the terms of his supervised release.

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, and having considered the arguments presented at the August 5, 2019 hearing, the Court recommends that Defendant be committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons to be imprisoned for a term of twelve (12) months and one day, with three (3) years of supervised release to follow.

The Court further recommends that Defendant serve his sentence at FCI Carswell, if appropriate.

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