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. Godfrey

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

October 30, 2019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
KATLIN QUATEZ GODFREY 9

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON REVOCATION OF SUPERVISED RELEASE

          K. NICOLE MITCHELL UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         On October 30, 2019, the Court held a final revocation hearing on a Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender under Supervision. The Government was represented by Assistant United States Attorney Ryan Locker. Defendant was represented by Assistant Federal Defender Ken Hawk.

         Background

         After pleading guilty to the offense of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute and Distribution of Methamphetamine (lesser included offense), a Class C felony, Defendant Katlin Quatez Godfrey was sentenced on October 12, 2016 by United States District Judge Ron Clark. The offense carried statutory maximum imprisonment terms of 20 years. The guideline imprisonment range, based on a total offense level of 23 and a criminal history category of VI, was 92 to 115 months. The Court accepted a binding plea agreement for a term of imprisonment below the guideline range. Defendant was sentenced to 54 months of imprisonment followed by a 3-year term of supervised release. Defendant's supervision is subject to the standard conditions of release, plus special conditions to include financial disclosure, drug aftercare, and vocational training.

         Defendant completed his term of imprisonment and started his term of supervised release on February 8, 2019. The case was reassigned to United States District Judge Jeremy D. Kernodle on October 24, 2019.

         Allegations

         In the Petition seeking to revoke Defendant's supervised release, filed on July 30, 2019, United States Probation Officer Laura Palafox alleges that Defendant violated the following conditions of supervised release:

1. Allegation 1 (mandatory condition): The defendant shall not commit another federal, state, or local crime. It is alleged that on June 25, 2019, Defendant was arrested for Criminal Trespass.
2. Allegation 2 (standard condition 7): The defendant shall refrain from excessive use of alcohol and shall not purchase, possess, use, distribute, or administer any controlled substance or any paraphernalia related to any controlled substances, except as prescribed by a physician. It is alleged that Defendant submitted urine specimens that tested positive for methamphetamine on July 16, 2019 and July 9, 2019 and tested positive for marijuana on May 8, 2019 and May 20, 2019. It is also alleged that on March 28, 2019 Defendant submitted a urine specimen that tested positive for Benzodiazepines.
3. Allegation 3 (standard condition 9): The defendant shall not associate with any persons engaged in criminal activity and shall not associate with any person convicted of a felony unless granted permission to do so by the probation officer. It is alleged that Defendant was arrested on June 25, 2019 at a residence where drug paraphernalia, cocaine, and marijuana were found.

         Applicable Law

         According to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), the Court may revoke the term of supervised release and require a Defendant to serve in prison all or part of the term of supervised release without credit for the time previously served under supervision, if it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendant violated a term of supervised release. Supervised release shall be revoked upon a finding of a Grade A or B supervised release violation. U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(a)(1). In the present case, Defendant's original offense of conviction was a Class C felony. Accordingly, the maximum imprisonment sentence that may be imposed is 2 years of imprisonment. 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e).

         Under the Sentencing Guidelines, which are non-binding, [1] if the Court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendant violated his conditions of supervised release by possessing methamphetamine as alleged in the petition, he is guilty of a Grade B violation. U.S.S.G. ยง 7B1.1(a). Defendant's original criminal history category was VI. The guidelines provide that Defendant's guideline range for a Grade B violation is 21 to 27 months of imprisonment, capped by the statutory maximum of 2 years. The remaining allegations in the petition are Grade C violations. ...


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.