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. Hampton

March 6, 2008

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CHARLES HAMPTON, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: H. Bruce Guyton United States Magistrate Judge

(Phillips/Guyton)

ORDER

All pretrial motions in this case have been referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) for disposition or report and recommendation regarding disposition by the District Court as may be appropriate. This matter came before the Court on March 6, 2008, for a hearing on a Petition for Action on Conditions of Pretrial Release.

On February 13, 2008, this Court released Charles Hampton pending trial after conducting a detention hearing at which the United States moved for the defendant's detention. Mr. Hampton's release was ordered subject to a number of conditions the Court found appropriate given the proof offered at the hearing. On March 3, 2008, the Court was presented with a report of Mr. Hampton's violation of these conditions by the Pretrial Services Officer in this case and issued the Petition for Action on Conditions of Pretrial Release, which was filed on March 3, 2008. Mr. Hampton was arrested and brought before the Court for a hearing on the Petition March 4, 2008. At that time, the government moved for his detention pending trial. Mr. Hampton was present with his counsel, Kim Tollison, and requested a hearing, denying the allegations in the Petition. Accordingly, this matter was set for hearing on March 6, 2008.

At the March 6, 2008, hearing, the United States, after further consultation with the Pretrial Services Officer, asked the Court to hold the hearing and ruling in abeyance pending laboratory results on a urinalysis recently performed to determine drug usage. Attorney Tollison agreed that this would be the most appropriate course of action under the circumstances. The parties stated that they may reach an agreement regarding the Petition, it may be withdrawn, or the parties may ask the Court to go forward with a hearing on the merits of the Petition, this dependant largely on the results of the laboratory testing. Pending further action, the parties have agreed that Mr. Hampton may be released pursuant to the existing conditions. The testing at issue is expected to be complete in about one week.

The Court has approved the agreement of the parties. IT IS ORDERED that the defendant be released after processing, subject to the conditions set forth in the Order Setting Conditions of Release [Doc. 11], entered February 11, 2008. At such time as further action on the Petition is ripe, or within 10 days of this Order, the parties shall contact chambers to advise the Court as to how they intend to proceed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20080306

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw ...

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.