Opinion
1:15-CR-136
12-14-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DAVD MATTHEW LESTER
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON PETITION FOR WARRANT FOR OFFENDER UNDER SUPERVISION
Zack Hawthorn United States Magistrate Judge
Pending is a “Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender Under Supervision” filed October 27, 2023, alleging that the Defendant, David Matthew Lester, 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(i) (2000); E.D. Tex. Crim. R. CR-59.
I. The Original Conviction and Sentence
Lester was sentenced on October 25, 2016, before The Honorable Thad Heartfield of the Eastern District of Texas after pleading guilty to the offense of Possession of Child PornographyCriminal Forfeiture, 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 25 and a criminal history category of II, was 63 to 78 months. Lester was subsequently sentenced below the advisory guideline range to 60 months imprisonment, followed by 5 years of supervised release, subject to the standard conditions of release, plus special conditions to include testing and treatment for substance abuse, financial disclosure, credit and gambling restrictions, mental health testing and treatment, no contact with minors, electronic and internet restrictions, no sexually explicit conduct, a search condition, adult education programs, $100 special assessment, and $5,000 restitution.
On October 25, 2019, the court modified the conditions of supervision to include 180 days in a residential reentry center, prerelease component, due to Lester failing to obtain an approved release plan.
II. The Period of Supervision
On November 6, 2019, Lester completed his period of imprisonment and began service of the supervision term. On December 2, 2019, the conditions of supervision were modified to include mental health treatment with medication monitoring. On January 13, 2020, the conditions of supervision were modified to update an original special condition to include software monitoring on approved internet-equipped devices. On February 27, 2023, the case was reassigned to The Honorable Marcia A. Crone in the Eastern District of Texas. On August 30, 2023, the conditions of supervision were modified to include alcohol restrictions.
III. The Petition
United States Probation filed the Petition for Warrant for Offender Under Supervision raising six allegations. The petition alleges that Lester violated the following conditions of release:
Allegation 1. The defendant shall refrain from any unlawful use of a controlled substance.
Allegation 2. The defendant shall work regularly at a lawful occupation, unless excused by the probation officer for schooling, training, or other acceptable reasons.
Allegation 3. The defendant shall report to the probation officer in a manner and frequency directed by the court or the probation officer.
Allegation 4. 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.
Allegation 5. The defendant shall not possess or view any images in any form of media or in any live venue that depicts sexually explicit conduct. For the purpose of this special condition of supervised release, the term “sexually explicit conduct” is as defined under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2256(2)(A) and is not limited to the sexual exploitation of children.
Allegation 6. 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.
IV. Proceedings
On December 7, 2023, the undersigned convened a hearing pursuant to Rule 32.1 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to hear evidence and arguments on whether the Defendant violated 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 as to a recommended disposition regarding the revocation. The Defendant agreed to plead “true” to the second allegation that claimed he failed to maintain a lawful occupation. The undersigned recommended that he should serve a term of two months' imprisonment, with 2 years of supervised release to follow.
V. Principles of Analysis
According to Title 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), the court may revoke a term of supervised release and require the 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 five years in prison if the offense that resulted in the term of supervised release is a Class A felony, more than three years if such offense is a Class B felony, more than two years in prison if such offense is a Class C or D felony, or more than one year in any other case. The original offense of conviction was a Class C felony, therefore, the maximum imprisonment sentence is 2 years.
According to U.S.S.G. § 7B1.1(a), if the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the Defendant violated conditions of supervision by failing to failing to work at a lawful occupation, the Defendant will be guilty of committing a Grade C violation. U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(a)(2) indicates that upon a finding of a Grade C violation, the court may (A) revoke probation or supervised release; or (B) extend the term of probation or supervised release and/or modify the conditions of supervision.
All of the policy statements in Chapter 7 that govern sentences imposed upon revocation of supervised release are non-binding. See U.S.S.G. Ch. 7 Pt. A; United States v. Price, 519 Fed.Appx. 560, 562 (11th Cir. 2013).
U.S.S.G. § 7B1.4(a) provides that in the case of revocation of supervised release based on a Grade C violation and a criminal history category of II, the policy statement imprisonment range is 4 to 10 months.
According to U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(c)(1), where the minimum term of imprisonment determined under U.S.S.G. § 7B1.4 is at least one month but not more than six months, the minimum term may be satisfied by (A) a sentence of imprisonment; or (B) a sentence of imprisonment that includes a term of supervised release with a condition that substitutes community confinement or home detention according to the schedule in U.S.S.G. § 5C1.1(e), for any portion of the minimum term.
According to U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(d), any restitution, fine, community confinement, home detention, or intermittent confinement previously imposed in connection with a sentence for which revocation is ordered that remains unpaid or unserved at the time of revocation shall be ordered to be paid or served in addition to the sanction determined under U.S.S.G. § 7B1.4 and any such unserved period of community confinement, home detention, or intermittent confinement may be converted to an equivalent period of imprisonment.
According to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(h), when a term of supervised release is revoked and the defendant is required to serve a term of imprisonment, the court may include a requirement that the defendant be placed on a term of supervised release after imprisonment. The length of such a term of supervised release shall not exceed the term of supervised release authorized by statute for the offense that resulted in the original term of supervised release, less any term of imprisonment that was imposed upon revocation of supervised release. The authorized term of supervised release for this offense is not more than Life.
U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(g)(2) indicates where supervised release is revoked and the term of imprisonment imposed is less than the maximum term of imprisonment imposable upon revocation, the court may include a requirement that the defendant be placed on a term of supervised release upon release from imprisonment. The length of such a term of supervised release shall not exceed the term of supervised release authorized by statute for the offense that resulted in the original term of supervised release, less any term of imprisonment that was imposed upon revocation of supervised release.
In determining the Defendant's sentence, the court shall consider:
1. The nature and circumstance of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant; see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1);
2. The need for the sentence imposed: to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct; to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and to provide the Defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, other corrective treatment in the most effective manner; see 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553 (a)(2)(B)-(D);
3. Applicable guidelines and policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission, for the appropriate application of the provisions when modifying or revoking supervised release pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 994(a)(3), that are in effect on the date the defendant is sentenced; see 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(4); see also 28 U.S.C. § 924(A)(3);
4. Any pertinent policy statement issued by the Sentencing Commission, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 994(a)(2), that is in effect on the date the defendant is sentenced; see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(5); and
5. The need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct; see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6).
6. The need to provide restitution to any victims of the offense.18 U.S.C. §§ 3583(e) and 3553(a).
VI. Application
The Defendant pled “true” to the petition's allegation that he violated a standard condition of release that he failed to maintain a lawful occupation. Based upon the Defendant's plea of “true” to this allegation of the Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender Under Supervision and U.S.S.G. § 7B1.1(a), the undersigned finds that the Defendant violated a condition of supervised release.
The undersigned has carefully considered each of the factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e). The Defendant's violation is a Grade C violation, and the criminal history category is II. The policy statement range in the Guidelines Manual is 4 to 10 months. The Defendant did not comply with the conditions of supervision and has demonstrated an unwillingness to adhere to conditions of supervision.
Consequently, incarceration appropriately addresses the Defendant's violation. The sentencing objectives of punishment, deterrence and rehabilitation along with the aforementioned statutory sentencing factors will best be served by a prison sentence of 2 months, with two years of supervised release to follow.
VII. Recommendations
The court should find that the Defendant violated the allegation in the petition that he violated a standard condition of release by failing to maintain a lawful occupation. The petition should be granted and the Defendant's supervised release should be revoked pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583. The Defendant should be sentenced to a term of 2 months' imprisonment, with two years of supervised release to follow.
As stated at the final revocation hearing, without objection, the same mandatory, standard and special conditions of supervised release previously imposed when the Defendant was originally sentenced in this case shall be re-imposed. Such conditions are set forth in the Judgment, and the rationale for these special conditions is contained in the Defendant's Presentence Investigation Report.
VIII. Objections
At the close of the revocation hearing, the Defendant, defense counsel, and counsel for the government each signed a standard form waiving their right to object to the proposed findings and recommendations contained in this report, consenting to revocation of supervised release, and consenting to the imposition of the above sentence recommended in this report (involving all conditions of supervised release, if applicable). The Defendant also waived his right to be present and speak and have his counsel present and speak before the district court imposes the recommended sentence. Therefore, the court may act on this report and recommendation immediately.
SIGNED this 14th day of December, 2023.