United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Northern Division, Covington
July 9, 2015
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff,
MARCO FINNELL, Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
DAVID L. BUNNING, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of United States Magistrate Judge Candace J. Smith, wherein she recommends that the Court revoke Defendant's supervised release and impose a sentence of twenty-four (24) months incarceration, with no supervised release to follow. (Doc. # 75). During the final revocation hearing conducted by Magistrate Judge Smith on June 25, 2015, Defendant stipulated to violation numbers 2 and 3, as set forth in the Violation Report of June 16, 2015.
Because Defendant executed a waiver of his right to allocution, and both parties waived the time for filing objections, the Clerk immediately submitted the R&R for the Court's review. (Doc. # 74). However, the Court has since received a letter from Defendant, docketed as an Objection to the R&R, in which he expresses his wish to obtain counsel for the purpose of filing an appeal. (Doc. # 76). Having reviewed the R&R and the correspondence received from Defendant, the Court concludes that the R&R is sound in all respects, including the recommended sentence and basis for said recommendation. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED as follows:
(1) The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 75) is hereby ADOPTED as the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Court;
(2) Defendant is found to have VIOLATED the terms of his supervised release, as set forth in violation numbers 2 and 3 of the June 16, 2015 Violation Report;
(3) The United States' oral Motion to Withdraw violations 1 and 4 of the June 16, 2015 Violation Report is GRANTED and those violations are WITHDRAWN;
(4) Defendant's supervised release is hereby REVOKED;
(5) Defendant is sentenced to the CUSTODY of the Attorney General for a period of TWENTY-FOUR (24) MONTHS, with no supervised release to follow;
(6) Defendant's sentence shall be served at FCI Ashland, if possible. In the event that FCI Ashland is unavailable, Defendant shall be placed at an available facility closest to Covington, Kentucky;
(7) To the extent that Defendant's letter constitutes an Objection to the R&R, such Objection is OVERRULED due to Defendant's failure to articulate specific legal arguments for the Court's review;
(8) Defendant's letter is also CONSTRUED as a Notice of Appeal. The Clerk of Court is therefore instructed to DOCKET the letter as a Notice of Appeal after entry of Judgment in this case; and
(9) To the extent that Defendant requests counsel for the purpose of preparing an appeal, his current counsel shall remain as counsel of record unless and until the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals finds it necessary to appoint new counsel.