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. Grundy

United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division

November 22, 2019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
QUANTEL Z. GRUNDY, Defendant.

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          TIM A. BAKER, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         On November 21, 2019, the Court held a hearing on the Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender Under Supervision filed on October 31, 2019. Defendant Grundy appeared in person with his appointed counsel Sam Ansell. The government appeared by Michelle Brady, Assistant United States Attorney. U.S. Parole and Probation appeared by Officer Mark McCleese.

         The Court conducted the following procedures in accordance with Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.1(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 3583:

         1. The Court advised Defendant Grundy of his rights and provided him with a copy of the petition. Defendant Grundy orally waived his right to a preliminary hearing.

         2. After being placed under oath, Defendant Grundy admitted violation number 2. [Docket No. 42.] Government moved to dismiss violation number 1 and the same granted.

         3. The allegations to which Defendant admitted, as fully set forth in the petition, are:

Violation Number

Nature of Noncompliance

2

You shall not meet, communicate, or otherwise interact with a person you know to be engaged, or planning to be engaged, in criminal activity. You shall report any contact with persons you know to be convicted felons to your probation officer within 72 hours of the contact.”

According to the Marion County case report, Korei Crawford and Ricky Williams were with Mr. Grundy at the time of the arrest. Both individuals have prior felony convictions.

         4. The parties stipulated that:

(a) The highest grade of violation is a Grade C violation.
(b) Defendant's criminal history category is III.
(c) The range of imprisonment applicable upon revocation of supervised release, therefore, is 5 to 11 months' imprisonment.

         5. The parties jointly recommended a modification to include home detention and location monitoring for a period of 180 days.

         The Magistrate Judge, having considered the factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and as more fully set forth on the record, finds that the Defendant violated the conditions in the petition, that his supervised release should be modified as follows:

         1. You shall report to the probation office in the district to which you are released within 72 hours of release from the custody of the Bureau of Prisons. Justification: This ...


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.