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. Alsup

United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Beaumont Division

January 4, 2018

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
CHRISTOPHER LEE ALSUP (1)

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON PETITION FOR WARRANT FOR OFFENDER UNDER SUPERVISION

          K. NICOLE, MITCHELL, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Pending is a “Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender under Supervision” filed November 20, 2017, alleging that the defendant, Christopher Lee Alsup, violated his conditions of supervised release. This matter is referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge for review, hearing, and submission of a report with recommended findings of fact and conclusions of law. See United States v. Rodriguez, 23 F.3d 919, 920 n. 1 (5th Cir. 1994); see also 18 U.S.C. § 3401(1) and Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to United States Magistrate Judges.

         I. The Original Conviction and Sentence

          Defendant was sentenced on October 26, 2011, by United States District Judge Marcia A. Crone, after pleading guilty to the offense of Possession of Material Involving the Sexual Exploitation of Minors, a Class C felony. This offense carried a statutory maximum imprisonment term of 10 years. The guideline imprisonment range, based on a total offense level of 30 and a criminal history category of I, was 97 to 120 months. Judge Crone sentenced Defendant to 108 months of imprisonment followed by a 5-year term of supervised release subject to the standard conditions of release, plus special conditions to include testing and treatment for drug and alcohol abuse, mental health treatment, no contact with minors, restrictions from pornography, search condition, computer monitoring conditions, computer and electronic restrictions, and sex offender registration.

         II. The Period of Supervision

         On September 7, 2017, Defendant completed his period of imprisonment and began service of the term of supervised release. Previously, on August 7, 2017, Defendant's supervised release conditions were modified to include 180 days in a residential reentry center.

         III. The Petition

         United States Probation Officer Ashley McKinney filed the Petition for Warrant for Offender under Supervision raising one allegation. The petition alleges that Defendant violated the following condition of release:

Allegation 1. Under the guidance and direction of the U.S. Probation Office, the defendant shall participate in a sex offender treatment program which may include the application of physiological testing instructions. The defendant shall pay any cost associated with treatment and testing. It is alleged that on or about November 9, 2017, Mr. Alsup was discharged unsuccessfully from sex offender treatment for failing to comply with the rules of the treatment program.

         IV. Proceedings

         On January 4, 2018, the undersigned convened a hearing pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 32.1 to hear evidence and arguments on whether the Defendant violated his conditions of supervised release, and the appropriate course of action for any such violations.

         At the revocation hearing, counsel for the Government and the Defendant announced an agreement had been reached as to a recommended disposition regarding the petition. The Defendant agreed to plead “true” to Allegation 1 in the petition. In addition, the parties agreed that the Defendant should be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 3 months to be followed by 5 years of supervised release.

         V. Applicable Law

         According to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), a court may revoke a term of supervised release and require a defendant to serve in prison all or part of the term of supervised release authorized by statute for the offense that resulted in such term of supervised release without credit for time previously served on post-release supervision, if the court, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure applicable to revocation of probation or supervised release, finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant violated a condition of supervised release, except that a defendant whose term is revoked under this paragraph may not be required to serve on any such revocation more than 5 years in prison if the offense that resulted in the term of supervised release is a Class A felony, more than 3 years if such offense is a Class B ...


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.