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. Swager

United States District Court, D. Montana, Helena Division

March 24, 2015

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
ANDREW THOMAS SWAGER, Defendant

ORDER

CHARLES C. LOVELL, Senior District Judge.

The Court referred the Petition for Revocation (Doc. 137) for hearing, findings of fact, and recommendation to Magistrate Judge Johnston by order filed on February 9, 2015 (Doc. 143).[1] Pending now before the Court is the Report of Findings & Recommendations ("F&R") filed by Magistrate Judge Johnston on February 18, 2015 (Doc. 147). There are no filed objections to the F&R.

I. Background

The following facts are taken from the F&R:

1. Andrew Thomas Swager violated Special Condition 3 of his supervised release by failing to appear for his sex offender treatment program on January 26, 2015.
2. Andrew Thomas Swager violated Standard Condition 3 of his supervised release by failing to follow the instructions of the probation officer.

(Doc. 147 at 6.) At the revocation hearing, Defendant Swager admitted that he violated Special Condition 3 and Standard Condition 3 as alleged by the petition. (Doc. 147 at 4.)

The F&R recommends that this Court find the Defendant has violated two conditions of his supervised release and sentence Defendant Swager to a term of imprisonment of six months, with a lifetime term of supervised release to follow under the same conditions of supervision as previously imposed.

II. Standard of Review

Pursuant to 28 U.S.c. § 636(b)(l) this Court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." The district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 FJd 1114, 1121 (9thCir. 2003). If an objection is made, the court reviews de novo only the portion to which the objection was made, the remainder is reviewed for clear error. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). No objection having been made, this Court reviews the F&R accordingly.

III. Discussion

This is Defendant's second revocation proceeding. Defendant's violation grade is C, his criminal history category is V, and his Chapter 7 Policy Guideline Range is 7 to 13 months imprisonment. Defendant is required to serve a term of lifetime supervision. The government requested a custody sentence of seven months, and the Defendant requested a custody sentence of four months. Magistrate Judge Johnston finds that sufficient mitigating circumstances exist to vary downward from the guidelines to a custody sentence of six months. Defendant failed to attend his treatment program because he was in the hospital, and Defendant did not abscond. (Doc. 147 at 5.)

IV. Revocation Determination and Sentence

The Court therefore finds by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendant violated two conditions of his supervised release. See 18 V.S.C. § 3583(e)(3). Defendant's supervised release should be, and hereby ...


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.