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. Adams

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

February 15, 2018

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PLAINTIFF
v.
MEGAN ADAMS DEFENDANT

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          CANDACE J. SMITH UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         On October 17, 2017, this matter came before the Court for a Final Revocation Hearing on the U.S. Probation Office's Report that Defendant Megan Adams had violated conditions of her supervised release.[1] (See R. 16). Upon call of this matter at the Final Revocation Hearing, Defendant admitted to Violation 1 as set forth in the Probation Officer's August 31, 2017 Supervised Release Violation Report and Violations 4 and 5 of the subsequent October 2, 2017 Addendum to Supervised Release Violation Report. The Government agreed to dismiss Violations 2 and 3. Parties then presented argument on the appropriate sentence. After hearing from counsel, the Probation Officer and Defendant, for the reasons that follow, it will be recommended that Defendant's supervised release be revoked and that she be sentenced to a 9-month term of imprisonment, with a 27-month term of supervised release to follow, which supervision shall include all conditions originally imposed, plus the Probation Officer's recommended additional terms pertaining to prescription medications.

         I. Background

         On January 15, 2016, Defendant Megan Adams was sentenced by the District Court in the Eastern District of Missouri to time served and 5 years of supervised release, following a plea of guilty to Conspiracy to Commit Offenses Against the United States in violation of Title 18 U.S.C. § 371 and two counts of Bank Fraud in violation of Title 18 U.S.C. § 1344. Defendant began her term of Supervised Release on January 15, 2016 under the supervision of the Eastern District of Missouri. Defendant's case was transferred from the Eastern District of Missouri to the Eastern District of Kentucky on March 29, 2016.

         Defendant is now before the Court charged with violating the terms of her supervised release. The charged violations were presented to the Court via the Probation Officer's August 31, 2017 Supervised Release Violation Report. At Defendant's initial appearance, because one of the violation charges was that she had failed to report for drug screen, she was ordered to submit to a drug test following court. Defendant appeared on September 25, 2017, for the scheduled final hearing. However, that hearing was continued pending the laboratory results of her drug screen which had initially returned positive for methamphetamine and amphetamine.

         On October 17, 2017, Defendant appeared for her rescheduled Final Revocation Hearing. At that time, the undersigned explained to Defendant that a Supplemental Violation Report had been issued by the U.S. Probation Office charging Defendant with additional violations since her initial appearance before the Court. In addition to reviewing the additional charges, the undersigned explained to Defendant how the potential penalties had changed in light of these additional charges. The undersigned explained to Defendant the new statutory maximum terms of incarceration and supervised release as well as the applicable range under the Sentencing Guidelines.

         Defendant acknowledged her understanding and stated it was her desire to plead guilty to Violation 1 set forth in the August 31, 2017, Violation Report, and Violations 4 and 5 of the subsequent October 2, 2017 Addendum.[2] Specifically, Defendant admitted to the following violations of her supervised release and the factual circumstances set forth below:

Violation #1: The Defendant shall answer truthfully all inquiries by the probation officer and follow the instructions of the probation officer.

         Defendant was enrolled in a drug testing program on February 2, 2017. As part of the program, she was instructed to call the probation office every weekday to see if she needed to report for testing. Defendant failed to report for drug testing on August 24, 2017. Defendant stated she was not aware she was supposed to report for testing, and did not call the probation office because she did not believe she had to report for testing because she was under a doctor's care. By not following the Probation Officer's instructions to call for testing, and failing to report for testing, Defendant has violated the conditions of her supervised release, and admitted to such violation. This is a Grade C Violation.

Violation #4: The Defendant shall refrain from excessive use of alcohol and shall not purchase, possess, use, distribute, or administer any controlled substance or any paraphernalia related to any controlled substances, except as prescribed by a physician.
Violation #5: The Defendant shall not commit another federal, state, or local crime.

         Defendant was ordered by the Court to submit to a urinalysis prior to her Final Revocation Hearing set for September 25, 2017. The initial results of that test were positive for methamphetamines and amphetamines, but the quantity of the sample was not sufficient to confirm the initial results. Defendant submitted a second sample later that day, and upon laboratory testing, the results returned positive for methamphetamines. Due to her use of methamphetamines, Defendant has violated the conditions of her supervised release, and admitted to such violation. This is a Grade C Violation.

         Defendant's positive drug screening also resulted in Violation 5, as Defendant unlawfully possessed methamphetamines. Within the Sixth Circuit, the use of controlled substances is equivalent to the possession of controlled substances. See United States v. Crace, 207 F.3d 833, 836 (6th Cir. 2000). Pursuant to the Controlled Substances Act, methamphetamine is considered a Schedule II Controlled Substance. Possession of methamphetamine constitutes conduct violative of KRS 218A.1415(1), a Class D felony. Defendant's use, and therefore possession, of methamphetamine thereby violated her federal supervision by engaging in conduct that violates state law. This is a Grade B violation.

         The undersigned is satisfied from the dialogue with Defendant at the October 17, 2017 Final Revocation Hearing that she understands the nature of the pending supervised release violation charges, has had ample opportunity to consult with counsel, understands that no promises have been made to her about any final sentence to be imposed in exchange for her admissions regarding the charges, and that she enters her admissions to the charges knowingly and voluntarily. Therefore, based upon Defendant's admissions, the undersigned finds and will recommend that the District Judge find Defendant has violated the conditions of her supervised release as charged.

         Defendant did not waive her right to allocute before the District Judge, or her right to appeal any sentence imposed by the District Judge. The parties did not reach an agreement on a suggested sentence for Defendant. Thus, the Court now turns to this issue.

         II. ...


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.