United Statesv.Tuong

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLEJan 11, 2012
CASE NO. CR06-309-TSZ (W.D. Wash. Jan. 11, 2012)

CASE NO. CR06-309-TSZ

01-11-2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. HOA DUY TUONG, Defendant.


SUMMARY REPORT OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE AS TO

ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF SUPERVISED RELEASE

An evidentiary hearing on supervised release revocation in this case was scheduled before me on January 11, 2012. The United States was represented by AUSA Lisca Borichewski and the defendant by Ralph Hurvitz. The proceedings were digitally recorded.

Defendant had been sentenced on or about March 23, 2007 by the Honorable Thomas S. Zilly on a charge of Possession of MDMA with Intent to Distribute, and sentenced to 37 months custody, three years supervised release.

The conditions of supervised release included the standard conditions plus the requirements that defendant participate in a substance abuse program, abstain from alcohol, submit to search, participate in a mental health program, provide his probation officer with financial information upon request, and not associate with any known gang members. (Dkt. 23.)

Defendant's probation officer reported that defendant tested positive for opiates on December 22, 2009. He was reprimanded and placed in a structured testing program. No further action was taken at the time. (Dkt. 31.) Defendant tested positive for cocaine on March 19, 2010, admitting use on March 17, 2010. He was reprimanded and referred for professional assessment. No further action was taken at the time. (Dkt. 32.)

In an application dated July 21, 2011 (Dkt.33, 34), U.S. Probation Officer Jennifer Van Flandern alleged the following violations of the conditions of supervised release:

1. Committing the crime of Felon in Possession of a Weapon on or about July 13, 2011, in Seattle, Washington, in violation of the general condition that he not commit a federal, state, or local crime.

Defendant was advised in full as to those charges and as to his constitutional rights.

Defendant admitted the violation and waived any evidentiary hearing as to whether it occurred. (Dkt. 42.)

I therefore recommend the Court find defendant violated his supervised release as alleged and that the Court conduct a hearing limited to the issue of disposition. The next hearing will be set before Judge Zilly, at the sentencing on the underlying charge.

Pending a final determination by the Court, defendant has been detained.

_____________________


Mary Alice Theiler


United States Magistrate Judge


cc: District Judge:


AUSA:


Defendant's attorney:


Probation officer:


Honorable Thomas S. Zilly


Lisca Borichewski


Ralph Hurvitz


Jennifer Van Flandern