United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, Chattanooga
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Christopher H. Steger United States Magistrate Judge
MATTHEWS (“Defendant”) came before the Court for
an initial appearance on June 15, 2017, in accordance with
Rule 32.1 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure on a
Petition for Warrant for Offender under Supervision
being sworn in due form of law, Defendant was informed of his
privilege against self-incrimination under the 5th Amendment
and his right to counsel under the 6th Amendment to the
United States Constitution.
Court determined Defendant wished to be represented by an
attorney and that he qualified for the appointment of an
attorney to represent him at government expense.
Consequently, the Court APPOINTED Erin Rust of Federal
Defender Services of Eastern Tennessee, Inc. to represent
was furnished with a copy of the Petition, and had an
opportunity to review that document with his attorney. The
Court determined that Defendant was able to read and
understand the Petition with the assistance of his counsel.
In addition, AUSA Perry Piper explained to Defendant the
specific charges contained in the Petition. Defendant
acknowledged that he understood the charges in the Petition.
Government moved Defendant be detained pending disposition of
the Petition or further Order of this Court. The Court
explained Defendant's right to a preliminary hearing and
detention hearing and what those hearings entail. Defendant
conferred with his counsel and waived a preliminary hearing;
however, Defendant requested a detention hearing.
Court conducted a detention hearing on June 19, 2017.
Defendant was represented by Erin Rust, and the Government
was represented by Perry Piper. The Government relied upon
the testimony of United States Probation Supervisor Shaquanna
Kennedy, as well as the sworn Petition which includes a
recitation of the violations of conditions of supervision
committed by Defendant (i.e., defendant shall
participate in a program of testing and/or treatment for drug
and/or alcohol abuse, as directed by the probation officer,
until such time as the defendant is released from the
program; defendant shall work regularly at a lawful
occupation, unless excused by the probation officer). More
specifically, the Government alleges that Defendant tested
positive for methamphetamine in July, September, and December
2016. As a result, Defendant's conditions of release were
modified to include 15 days of intermittent confinement.
Defendant served 15 days at the Silverdale Corrections Center
and was released on March 28, 2017. After his release from
custody, Defendant failed to report for drug tests on March
29 and April 18, and he submitted a diluted urine sample on
April 25, 2017. In addition, the Government alleges that he
has not consistently maintained employment since August 2016.
counsel, Erin Rust, relied upon the testimony of Wayne Moody.
Mr. Moody testified that Defendant has been participating in
a job training curriculum sponsored by an organization known
as “Impact One.” He indicated that Defendant has
reported to work sober and on time, that he has excellent
skills as an electrician, and that Defendant has exhibited a
constructive and positive attitude. Attorney Rust also
proffered evidence on Defendant's behalf to the effect
that Defendant has passed a number of drug tests and that he
is taking positive steps to overcome his addiction to
methamphetamine. Counsel for both sides were given an
opportunity to argue for and against detention.
Court finds that the evidence establishes probable cause to
believe that Defendant has committed some violations of his
conditions of supervised release. The evidence also
establishes that Defendant has taken positive steps by
participating in drug treatment through CADAS and
participating in job training through Impact One. He is to be
commended for these positive steps. The Court finds that
Defendant has carried the burden of establishing by clear and
convincing evidence that he will not flee or pose a danger to
any other person or to the community. Consequently, the Court
DENIED the Government's oral motion to
detain Defendant pending disposition of the Petition or
further Order of this Court.
undersigned discussed with Defendant the violations of his
conditions of supervised release which have occurred, and
admonished Defendant to refrain from any additional
violations pending resolution of the current Petition, and
for the remainder of his period of supervised release.
therefore, ORDERED that:
Counsel for Defendant and the Government shall confer and
make best efforts to submit to United States District Judge
Mattice a proposed Agreed Order with respect to an
appropriate disposition of the Petition for Warrant for
Offender Under Supervision.
the event counsel are unable to reach agreement with respect
to an appropriate disposition of the Petition for Warrant for
Offender under Supervision, they shall request a ...