United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Southern Division
A. INGRAM UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
referral from District Judge Van Tatenhove (D.E. 526), the
Court considers reported violations of supervised release
conditions by Defendant Rodney Bishop. This is his fourth
Van Tatenhove entered a judgment against Defendant on
November 17, 2010, for conspiracy to manufacture a mixture or
substance containing methamphetamine, conspiracy to possess
with the intent to distribute a mixture or substance
containing methamphetamine, and possession of pseudoephedrine
to manufacture methamphetamine. D.E. 342. Defendant was
sentenced to seventy months of imprisonment on each count to
run concurrently, followed by three years of supervised
release on each count to run concurrently. Id.
Defendant began his initial term of supervised release on
March 6, 2014.
November 2014, Defendant's release was revoked for
failing to submit monthly reports to the United States
Probation Office (“USPO”), failing to notify the
USPO of a change in residence and employment, failing to pay
restitution, using methamphetamine, and committing another
federal, state, or local crime based on his drug use.
Defendant stipulated to the violations and was sentenced to
fourteen months of imprisonment plus three years of
supervised release. D.E. 464, 466, 467. Defendant began his
second term of supervised release on September 4, 2015.
was arrested in November 2015 and revoked again in April 2016
for using methamphetamine and committing another federal,
state, or local crime based on his drug use. Defendant
stipulated to both violations and was sentenced to seventeen
months of imprisonment and supervised release to expire on
September 3, 2018. D.E. 486, 489, 490. Two special conditions
were added. One required him to immediately enroll in, and
complete, a long-term inpatient substance abuse treatment
program, and the other set a status conference before the
Court to assess Defendant's progress and evaluate early
termination of his term of supervised release. D.E. 490.
Defendant was released on January 27, 2017, to begin service
of his third term of supervised release.
February 7, 2017, Defendant enrolled in a ninety-day
inpatient treatment program, and successfully completed it on
May 7, 2017. The Court was notified of his successful
completion and scheduled a status conference for July 11,
2017. D.E. 495. However, on that day, the USPO notified the
Court of new violations. Defendant's release was revoked
a third time in August 2017 for using methamphetamine,
committing the crime of methamphetamine possession, failing
to truthfully answer questions by the probation officer, and
failure to submit to drug testing. He was sentenced to 24
months of imprisonment, to be followed by one year of
supervised release. D.E. 504, 507, 508. A condition was added
that a status conference be held after six months of
successful supervised release to discuss the possibility of
early termination. D.E. 508 at 5.
was most recently released from prison on April 5, 2019. He
reported to the Probation Office that same day and submitted
a urine specimen that tested positive for methamphetamine.
April 10, 2019, the USPO issued a Supervised Release
Violation Report (“the Report”) that initiated
this revocation. The Report charges three violations.
According to the Report:
On April 9, 2019, the defendant reported to the U.S.
Probation Office in London, following his release from the
Bureau of Prisons on April 5, 2019. This Officer requested a
urine specimen from the defendant for drug testing purposes.
While the defendant was attempting to produce the urine
specimen, he positioned himself where this Officer could not
properly observe the specimen, and he was instructed to stand
directly in front of the toilet. The defendant failed to
comply, and this Officer instructed him a second time to
stand in front of the toilet, which he again failed to do.
This Officer subsequently observed the defendant attempting
to hide an object in his underwear, and he was directed to
remove the object from his person. The defendant eventually
removed from his underwear a small plastic bottle, with a
temperature strip, containing what appeared to be urine. The
defendant indicated he smoked methamphetamine on the night of
April 5, 2019, and he tampered with the drug test because he
thought he may still be positive. The defendant advised he
could not produce a urine specimen at that time. The
defendant subsequently initialed and signed a Positive
Urinalysis Admission Report admitting to the use of
methamphetamine on April 5, 2019. He eventually produced a
urine specimen which tested positive for the presence of
amphetamine and methamphetamine via instant testing device.
Report charges, in Violation #1, a violation of the condition
requiring that Defendant refrain from any unlawful use of a
controlled substance. Based on the above narrative, this
violation is based on Defendant's admitted use of
methamphetamine. This is a Grade C violation.
#2 charges a violation of the conditions requiring that
Defendant not commit another federal, state, or local crime
and that he not unlawfully possess a controlled substance.
Violation #2 alleges that, due to Defendant's prior drug
conviction and with the Sixth Circuit's ruling that use
is the equivalent of possession, “simple possession of
methamphetamine constitutes conduct in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§ 844(a), a Class E Felony.” This is a Grade B
violation. Violation #3 charges a violation of the condition
requiring that Defendant not obstruct or attempt to obstruct