Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Burton

United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Northern Division, Ashland

October 30, 2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CHRISTOPHER STEPHEN BURTON, DEFENDANT.

          RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION

          EDWARD B. ATKINS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         This matter came before the undersigned for a revocation hearing on August 28, 2017, in Ashland, Kentucky. The charges forming the basis of this action are that on May 12, 2017, the Defendant admitted to the illegal use of marijuana, and signed an acknowledgment admitting such use. As a result, he was charged with violating the following two conditions of supervision:

         (1) The defendant shall refrain from excessive use of alcohol and shall not purchase, possess, use distribute, or administer any narcotic or other controlled substance, or any paraphernalia related to any controlled substances, except as prescribed by a physician (a Grade C violation); and, (2) The defendant shall not commit another federal, state, or local crime (a Grade B violation).

         At the hearing of August 28, 2017, Richard Hughes, Esq., a member of the Court's CJA panel, was appointed to represent Mr. Burton. The United States was present by and through Assistant United States Attorney, David Marye. At that time, the parties informed the Court that the Defendant agreed to admit to the Violation No. 1, which prohibited the use of controlled substances, and Violation No. 2, charging possession of a controlled substance. The matter proceeded by the Court placing the defendant under oath and, after being advised of all applicable rights, including the right to remain silent, his right to the assistance of counsel, and all rights to a final hearing, the Defendant tendered his plea of guilty to Violation No. 1 and Violation No. 2, in a knowing, intelligent and voluntary fashion. In doing so, Burton admitted to use and possession of marijuana in violation of the conditions of his supervision. As the violations have been established by a preponderance of the evidence, the undersigned recommends that the Defendant be found guilty of both violations. At that time, upon the agreement of counsel, the matter was continued and the Defendant was released on the conditions of supervision.

         On October 19, 2017, the matter was called for the purpose of allocution. The parties were present and represented by counsel. The violations in this case having been established by a preponderance of the evidence, the Court turns to consideration of an appropriate sentence. The Defendant, in the presence of counsel was fully advised of his right of allocution before a United States District Judge. He acknowledged an understanding of that right, expressed his desire to waive it and proceed with allocution before the undersigned. A written waiver confirming his intentions was executed on the record, in the presence of counsel and entered into the official court record. [R. 269].

         SENTENCING RECOMMENDATION

         I.

         In determining the appropriate sentence in this case, the Court looks to the provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), for the factors that must be considered in order for a sentence to be properly calculated and imposed. The statute provides:

         The court shall impose a sentence sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to comply with the purposes set forth in paragraph (2) of this subsection. The Court, in determining the particular sentence to be imposed, shall consider -

(1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant;
(2) the need for the sentence imposed -
(A) to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense;
(B) to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct;
(C) to protect the public from further crimes of the ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.