United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
J. Dinsmore United States Magistrate Judge.
November 4, and December 3, 2019, the Court held hearings on
the Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender Under
Supervision filed on August 29, 2019. [Dkt. 4.] Defendant
Justice appeared in person with his appointed counsel Sam
Ansell and Julie Treida. The government appeared by Steve
DeBrota, Assistant United States Attorney. U.S. Parole and
Probation appeared by Officer Felecia White.
Court conducted the following procedures in accordance with
Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.1(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 3583:
Court advised Defendant Justice of his rights and ensured he
had a copy of the Petition. Defendant Justice orally waived
his right to a preliminary hearing.
After being placed under oath, Defendant Justice admitted
violation numbers 1, 2, 3, and 4 as set forth in the
Petition. [Dkt. 4.]
allegations to which Defendant admitted, as fully set forth
in the Petition, are:
Nature of Noncompliance
“The defendant shall not commit another
federal, state or local crime.”
On May 16, 2019, a search was conducted on the
offender in which multiple electronic devices were
confiscated as evidence. The devices were sent for
forensic analysis and at least one device was found`
to contain nude images of prepubescent minors. The
possession of these images is in violation of 18
U.S.C. Section 2252.
“The defendant shall no[t] possess any
pornography, erotica or nude images.
Any such material found in the defendant's
possession shall be considered contraband and may be
confiscated by the probation officer.”
On May 16, 2019, a search conducted at the
offender's residence produced electronic devices
that contained nude images of prepubescent minors.
“The defendant shall abide by the
Computer Restriction and Monitoring Program of the
U.S. Probation Office, which includes his consent to
having installed on his computer(s), any hardware or
software systems to monitor his computer use.
Monitoring will occur on a random and/or regular
basis. The defendant will warn other occupants/or
uses of the existence of the monitoring software
placed on his computer(s).”
A search conducted on May 16, 2019, produced at least
two laptop computers that were not reported to the
U.S. Probation office and were not being monitored.
“The defendant shall not unlawfully
possess a controlled substance. The defendant shall
refrain from any unlawful use of a controlled
On May 16, 2019, the offender provided a urine sample
that yielded positive for marijuana.
Court finds that:
(a) The highest grade of violation is a Grade B violation.
(b) Defendant's criminal history category is I.
(c) The range of imprisonment applicable upon revocation of
supervised release, therefore, is 4 to 10 months'
parties jointly recommended a sentence of ten (10) months
imprisonment with lifetime supervision to follow. Upon
release, the Government will withhold prosecution for the
images found on Defendant's computer if no further crimes
are committed by Defendant. Defendant agreed to forfeiture of
the computer seized at the time of Defendant's arrest.
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 set forth in
the Petition, and recommends that Defendant's supervised
release be revoked, and that Defendant be sentenced to the
custody of the Attorney General or his designee for a period
of ten (10) months, with lifetime supervision to follow. In
addition to the mandatory conditions of supervision, the
following conditions of supervised release, as set forth in
the Revocation Parameters Worksheet [Dkt. 4-3], will be
1. You shall report to the probation office in the judicial
district to which you are released within 72 hours of release
from the ...