United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin
Barbara B. Crabb, U.S. District Judge.
hearing on the probation office's petition for judicial
review of Randall E. Springen's supervised release was
held on September 27, 2017, before U.S. District Judge
Barbara B. Crabb. The government appeared by Assistant U.S.
Attorney Meredith Duchemin. Defendant was present in person
and by counsel William Jones. Also present was U.S. Probation
Officer Jelani Brown.
the record I make the following findings of fact.
was sentenced in the Western District of Wisconsin on April
20, 2004, following his conviction for distribution of
cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18
U.S.C. § 2. This offense is a Class C felony. He was
committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons to serve a
term of imprisonment of 160 months, to be followed by a
three-year term of supervised release. On February 14, 2015,
defendant began his term of supervised release.
violated Standard Condition No. 3, requiring him to answer
truthfully all inquiries by the probation officer and to
follow the instructions of the officer. Although defendant
was told on June 27, 2017, to report to the probation office
on July 7, 2017, at 10:00 a.m., he failed to report as
instructed and told his probation officer that he believed
the scheduled appointment was on July 11, 2017. The probation
officer disagreed but rescheduled the appointment for July
11, 2017. Defendant failed to follow that instruction and did
not report for the July 11 appointment. He later told his
probation officer that he had been in the hospital for MRSA
27, 2017, defendant admitted that he had a substance abuse
problem and agreed to submit to sweat patch testing, as
instructed by his probation officer. The officer told
defendant to report to the probation office on August 10,
2017, to have his sweat patch removed. On August 11, 2017,
defendant told the officer that he did not report on August
10, 2017, because he was again being treated for MRSA. He
said that he had removed the sweat patch approximately five
days earlier and had the patch in his possession.
August 17, 2017, defendant informed his probation officer
that his MRSA problem was in remission. Defendant was
instructed by his probation officer to report to Attic
Residential Services for substance abuse treatment on August
24, 2017, no later than 2:00 p.m. Defendant failed to follow
this instruction. He reported that he was hospitalized again
for MRSA treatment and could not report as instructed. On
September 1, 2017, defendant reported to Attic, but left the
facility at 6:45 p.m. to pay a debt. Although the probation
officer directed defendant to return to the treatment
facility by 8:30 p.m., he failed to return to the treatment
facility as instructed.
violated Standard Condition No. 7 of his supervised release
prohibiting him from using illegal drugs. He submitted a
urine specimen that tested positive for cocaine and opiates
on June 27, 2017. Defendant admitted that he used cocaine on
June 24, 2017, and explained that his girlfriend had
cautioned him about using cocaine because she knew that he
had to see his probation officer that day. In response,
defendant told his girlfriend that he was “not going to
change his routine.” On July 27, 2017, defendant
submitted another urine specimen that tested positive for
cocaine and opiate. He again admitted using cocaine and
opiates; however, he claimed that the opiates were prescribed
for him by a physician. The probation officer asked defendant
to produce a valid prescription but defendant never did so.
September 1, 2017, defendant reported to Attic Residential
Services in Madison, Wisconsin, to participate in a
residential substance abuse treatment program. Defendant was
discharged from the program after he refused to return to the
facility because, he said, he did not want to be housed in
the same treatment facility with sex offenders.
has had difficulty conforming his behavior to the probation
office's expectations, including following the
officer's instructions, abstaining from drug use and
participating fully in substance abuse treatment. However, it
appears that he is eager to make a new attempt at completing
the 27-day residential treatment program at Attic
Correctional Services in Madison, Wisconsin.
defendant's violations would warrant revocation. However,
both the government and defense counsel believe that
defendant should have another opportunity to complete the
Attic residential treatment program, and the supervising
probation officer agrees. Defendant is aware that ...