United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin
BARBARA B. CRABB District Judge
hearing on the probation office's petition for judicial
review of Christopher Hamlin's supervised release was
held on November 29, 2016, before U.S. District Judge Barbara
B. Crabb. The government appeared by U.S. Attorney Meredith
P. Duchemin. Defendant was present in person and by counsel
William Jones. Also present was U.S. Probation Officer
Nicholas A. Tuma.
the record and the parties' stipulation, I make the
following findings of fact.
was sentenced in the Western District of Wisconsin on
February 25, 2010, following his conviction for possession of
an unregistered firearm, in violation of 26 U.S.C. §
5861(d). This offense is a Class C felony. Defendant was
committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons for a term
of 84 months, to run concurrently with the remainder of his
state sentences imposed by the Circuit Court for Jefferson
County, Wisconsin, in case nos. 06CF517, 06CM791, 06CM628,
06CM770, 06CF446, 06CM686 and 06CM419; and by the Circuit
Court for Dodge County, Wisconsin, in case no. 06CF271. The
term of imprisonment was to be followed by a three-year term
of supervised release. Defendant began his term of supervised
release on April 8, 2016.
violated the mandatory condition of his supervised release
prohibiting him from committing another federal, state or
local crime, when he stole property. He was charged in the
Circuit Court for Jefferson County, Wisconsin, case no.
16CM336 for theft of movable property worth less than $2,
500, and he entered a plea of guilty to the charge on October
25, 2016. A sentencing hearing is scheduled for January 12,
2017. On November 8, 2016, defendant was pulled over by a
Wisconsin State Patrol trooper and issued a citation for
operating a motor vehicle without insurance.
violated Special Condition No. 6 of his supervised release,
prohibiting him from the use of alcohol and illegal drugs, as
shown by two positive urine specimens that he provided on
April 26 and July 8, 2016 and which tested positive for
marijuana. He has admitted that he had been using the drug
daily. On August 4, 2016 and September 8, 2016, he provided
urine specimens that tested positive for cocaine and he has
admitted smoking crack cocaine. On October 13, 2016,
defendant submitted a urine specimen that tested positive for
both cocaine and marijuana. He admitted using both substances
as a "last hurrah" before his court-ordered
location monitoring equipment was installed. Defendant
admitted that he drank alcohol on October 28, 2016. He has
admitted that he used cocaine that led to the urine specimen
on October 31, 2016, that tested positive for cocaine.
violated Special Condition No. 8, requiring him to
participate for a period of 90 days in a location monitoring
program through the use of radio frequency monitoring,
passive global positioning system monitoring, active GPS
monitoring or voice recognition. Defendant was required to
abide by the technology requirements implemented at the
direction of the supervising U.S. probation officer. Instead,
he tampered with his location monitoring bracelet by removing
it from his ankle without permission from the probation
office. His whereabouts were unknown for approximately 15
hours. Defendant later admitted that he had removed the
bracelet without permission.
§ 7B1.1(a)(3), defendant's conduct falls into the
category of a Grade C violation. Section 7B1.3(a)(2) of the
advisory guidelines provides that when the court finds that
the defendant has committed a Grade C violation, it may
revoke supervised release, extend the term of supervised
release or modify the conditions of supervision. Under
United States v. Trotter, 270 F.3d 1150, 1152 (7th
Cir. 2001), the court may also find that a defendant's
conduct falls into the category of a Grade B violation, if it
is determined that he possessed a controlled substance when
he used the controlled substances set out in this order. If
the court finds that defendant possessed a controlled
substance triggering a Grade B violation, the advisory
guideline range of imprisonment becomes 21 to 27 months.
§ 7B1.3(a)(1), the court is to revoke supervised release
if it finds that defendant has committed a Grade B violation.
In addition, under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(g) revocation is
mandatory if the defendant possesses a controlled substance
or if, during the course of drug testing, the defendant tests
positive for illegal controlled substances more than three
times over the course of one year.
violations warrant revocation if his noncompliance continues.
I will hold judicial review in this matter in abeyance to
provide defendant an alternative to revocation. Defendant
will be given another chance to show that he can succeed on
supervised release. A term of participation in an inpatient
treatment program at ATTIC Residential Services, Inc., in
Madison, Wisconsin, will afford him the opportunity to engage
in correctional treatment and make efforts at rehabilitation
that address the risks he presents and his need for positive
change. Defendant is warned that if he continues to resist
programming and treatment, he will be brought back to court
for a new hearing on revocation.
insure that defendant does not use any illegal drugs before
entering the residential treatment program, he is remanded to
the custody of the United States Marshals Service until such
time as a bed is available at the ATTIC Residential Services.
ORDERED that revocation proceedings as to the period of
supervised release imposed on defendant Christopher Hamlin on
February 25, 2016, are held in abeyance. Defendant is
remanded to the custody of the United States Marshals Service
until he can enter the residential treatment program at ATTIC
Residential Services in Madison, Wisconsin. Defendant is
required to comply fully with all the ...