United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
MARK J. DINSMORE, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the undersigned according to the Order entered by the Honorable Jane Magnus-Stinson, directing the criminal duty Magistrate Judge to conduct a hearing on the Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender Under Supervision ("Petition") filed on June 23, 2014, and to submit proposed Findings of Facts and Recommendations for disposition under 18 U.S.C. §§ 3401(i) and 3583(e). [Dkt. 48.] Proceedings were held on July 10, 2014 and August 26, 2014 in accordance with Rule 32.1 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. [Dkts. 50, 51.]
On July 10, 2014, defendant Patricia Crawford appeared in person with her appointed counsel, William Dazey. The government appeared by Gayle Helart, Assistant United States Attorney. The United States Probation Office ("USPO") appeared by Officer Diane Asher, who participated in the proceedings.
On August 26, 2014, defendant Patricia Crawford appeared in person with her appointed counsel, William Dazey. The government appeared by Gayle Helart, Assistant United States Attorney. The United States Probation Office ("USPO") appeared by Officer Patrick Jarosh, who participated in the proceedings.
The court conducted the following procedures in accordance with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 3583:
1. The court advised Ms. Crawford of her right to remain silent, her right to counsel, and her right to be advised of the charges against her. The court asked Ms. Crawford questions to ensure that she had the ability to understand the proceedings and her rights.
2. A copy of the Petition was provided to Ms. Crawford and her counsel, who informed the court they had reviewed the Petition and that Ms. Crawford understood the violations alleged.
3. The Court advised Ms. Crawford of her right to a preliminary hearing and its purpose with regard to the alleged violations of his supervised release specified in the Petition. Ms. Crawford was also advised of the rights she would have at a preliminary hearing. Ms. Crawford executed a written waiver of her right to a preliminary hearing, which the Court accepted.
4. The Court advised Ms. Crawford of her right to a hearing on the Petition and of her rights in connection with a hearing.
5. Ms. Crawford, by counsel, stipulated that she committed Violation Numbers 1, 2 and 3 set forth in the Petition as follows:
7. The Government orally moved to dismiss Violation Number 4 and the same was granted.
8. The Court placed Ms. Crawford under oath and directly inquired of Ms. Crawford whether she admitted to Violation Numbers 1, 2, and 3 of her supervised release set forth above. Ms. Crawford then ...