Free Sealed Document - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:04-cr-00082-EWN

Document 59

Filed 05/04/2007

Page 1 of 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO U. S. A. vs. GREGORY HOUSTON Docket Number: 04-cr-00082-EWN Petition on Supervised Release COMES NOW, Gary R. Kruck, probation officer of the court, presenting an official report upon the conduct and attitude of GREGORY HOUSTON who was placed on supervision by the Honorable Edward W. Nottingham sitting in the court at Denver, Colorado, on the 14th day of January, 2005, who fixed the period of supervision at three (3) years, and imposed the general terms and conditions theretofore adopted by the court and also imposed special conditions and terms as follows: 1. The defendant shall participate in a program of testing and treatment for drug abuse, as directed by the probation officer, until such time as the defendant is released from the program by the probation officer. The defendant shall abstain from the use of alcohol or other intoxicants during the course of treatment. He shall pay all costs associated with this program. $100.00 special assessment fee.

2.

On September 20, 2005, the defendant' conditions of supervised release were modified to include a condition s requiring the defendant to reside in a community corrections center for a period of up to four (4) months, or until such time as the defendant is released from the facility by the probation officer. The defendant shall observe the rules of that facility. On November 20, 2006, a warrant was issued for alleged violations of supervised release. On November 30, 2006, the defendant was released on bond pending the violation hearing. The defendant was ordered to reside in a residential re-entry center as a condition of bond. On January 18, 2007, the defendant' pending violation hearing was vacated and the defendant' conditions of s s supervised release were modified to include the following special conditions of supervised release: The defendant shall reside in a residential re-entry center for a period of up to four (4) months, or until released from the facility by the probation officer. The defendant shall observe the rules of that facility; the defendant shall ingest monitored antabuse if not medically contraindicated; the defendant shall refrain from the use of alcohol. RESPECTFULLY PRESENTING PETITION FOR ACTION OF COURT FOR CAUSE AS FOLLOWS: See attachment hereto and herein incorporated be reference. PRAYING THAT THE COURT WILL ORDER the issuance of a warrant for violations of supervised release and that the petition and warrant be sealed until the arrest of the defendant. ORDER OF THE COURT Considered and ordered this 4th day of May, 2007, and ordered filed and made a part of the record in the above case. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. s/ Gary R. Kruck Gary R. Kruck Senior U.S. Probation Officer s/ Edward W. Nottingham Edward W. Nottingham Place: Denver, Colorado

Case 1:04-cr-00082-EWN
U.S. District Judge

Document 59

Filed 05/04/2007

Page 2 of 6

May 2, 2007 ATTACHMENT

On January 21, 2005, the conditions of supervised release were read to and explained to the defendant. On that day he acknowledged in writing that the conditions had been read to him, that he fully understood the conditions, and that he was given a copy of them. The term of supervised release commenced on January 14, 2005. The defendant has violated the following conditions of supervised release: 1. USE OF ALCOHOL:

On or about November 17, 2006, the defendant ingested alcohol, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: On November 17, 2006, the Probation Office received written notification from Correctional Management Incorporated (CMI), indicating that the defendant provided a positive breath test which registered at .108. The defendant has a special condition of supervised release ordering him to refrain from the use of alcohol or other intoxicants during the course of drug treatment. The defendant was enrolled in treatment at the time of the positive breath test. 2. USE OF ALCOHOL:

On or about November 16, 2006, the defendant ingested alcohol, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: On November 16, 2006, the Probation Office received written notification from Correctional Management Incorporated (CMI), indicating that the defendant provided a positive breath test which registered at .023. The defendant has a special condition of supervised release ordering him to refrain from the use of alcohol or other intoxicants during the course of drug treatment. The defendant was enrolled in treatment at the time of the positive breath test. 3. USE OF ALCOHOL:

On or about September 20, 2006, the defendant ingested alcohol, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: On September 20, 2006, the Probation Office received written notification from Addiction Research and Treatment Services (ARTS), indicating that the defendant provided a positive breath test which registered at .046. The defendant has a special condition of supervised release ordering him to refrain from the use of alcohol or other intoxicants during the course of drug treatment. The defendant was enrolled in treatment at the time of the positive breath test.

Case 1:04-cr-00082-EWN 4. USE OF ALCOHOL:

Document 59

Filed 05/04/2007

Page 3 of 6

On or about November 20, 2006, the defendant ingested alcohol, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: On November 20, 2006, the Probation Office received written notification from Correctional Management Incorporated (CMI), indicating that the defendant provided a positive breath test which registered at .061. The defendant has a special condition of supervised release ordering him to refrain from the use of alcohol or other intoxicants during the course of drug treatment. The defendant was enrolled in treatment at the time of the positive breath test. 5. FAILURE TO PARTICIPATE IN SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT AS DIRECTED BY THE PROBATION OFFICER:

The defendant failed to provide a breath alcohol test at Correctional Management Incorporated (CMI), the testing and treatment program in which the probation officer had directed him to participate, on November 18, and 19, 2006, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: The Probation Office received written notification from CMI that the defendant failed to provide a random breath test on November 18, and 19, 2006.

6.

POSSESSION AND USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE:

On or about August 24, 2005, the defendant used or administered a controlled substance, cocaine, which had not been prescribed to him by a physician, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: On August 24, 2005, the defendant provided a urine specimen at Addiction Research and Treatment Services (ARTS) which tested positive for cocaine. The defendant admitted using cocaine. 7. POSSESSION AND USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE:

On or about August 15, 2005, the defendant used or administered a controlled substance, cocaine, which had not been prescribed to him by a physician, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: On August 15, 2005, the defendant provided a urine specimen at Addiction Research and Treatment Services (ARTS) which tested positive for cocaine. The defendant admitted using cocaine. 8. POSSESSION AND USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE:

On or about August 8, 2005, the defendant used or administered a controlled substance, cocaine, which had not been prescribed to him by a physician, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release.

Case 1:04-cr-00082-EWN This charge is based on the following facts:

Document 59

Filed 05/04/2007

Page 4 of 6

On August 8, 2005, the defendant provided a urine specimen at Addiction Research and Treatment Services (ARTS) which tested positive for cocaine. The defendant admitted using cocaine. 9. POSSESSION AND USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE:

On or about May 4, 2005, the defendant used or administered a controlled substance, cocaine, which had not been prescribed to him by a physician, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: On May 4, 2005, the defendant provided a urine specimen at Addiction Research and Treatment Services (ARTS) which tested positive for cocaine. The defendant admitted using cocaine. 10. FAILURE TO PARTICIPATE IN SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT AS DIRECTED BY THE PROBATION OFFICER:

The defendant failed to provide a urine specimen at Correctional Management Incorporated (CMI), the testing and treatment program in which the probation officer had directed him to participate, on October 5, and 22, 2006, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: The Probation Office received written notification from CMI that the defendant failed to provide a random urine specimen on October 5, and 22, 2006. 11. FAILURE TO PARTICIPATE IN SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT AS DIRECTED BY THE PROBATION OFFICER:

The defendant failed to provide a urine specimen at Addiction Research and Treatment Services (ARTS), the testing and treatment program in which the probation officer had directed him to participate, on April 11, and June 29, 2005, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: The Probation Office received written notification from ARTS that the defendant failed to provide a random urine specimen on April 11, and June 29, 2006. 12. FAILURE TO PARTICIPATE IN DRUG/ALCOHOL TREATMENT AS DIRECTED BY THE PROBATION OFFICER:

The defendant failed to attend substance abuse treatment at Correctional Management Incorporated (CMI), the substance abuse treatment program in which the probation officer had directed him to participate, October 4, and November 13, 2006, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: The Probation Office received written notification that the defendant failed to attend substance abuse treatment at CMI on October 4, and November 13, 2006.

Case 1:04-cr-00082-EWN 13.

Document 59

Filed 05/04/2007

Page 5 of 6

FAILURE TO PARTICIPATE IN DRUG/ALCOHOL TREATMENT AS DIRECTED BY THE PROBATION OFFICER:

The defendant failed to attend group substance abuse treatment at Addiction Research and Treatment Services (ARTS), the substance abuse treatment program in which the probation officer had directed him to participate, on February 10, 24, March 17, 24, May 17, November 1, 2005, and January 24, 2006, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: The Probation Office received written notification that the defendant failed to attend group substance abuse treatment at ARTS on February 10, 24, March 17, 24, May 17, November 1, 2005, and January 24, 2006. 14. FAILURE TO PARTICIPATE IN DRUG/ALCOHOL TREATMENT AS DIRECTED BY THE PROBATION OFFICER:

The defendant failed to attend individual substance abuse treatment at Addiction Research and Treatment Services (ARTS), the substance abuse treatment program in which the probation officer had directed him to participate, on March 28, July 25, August 19, October 10, 2005, March 2, 29, June 22, 2006, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: The Probation Office received written notification that the defendant failed to attend substance abuse treatment at ARTS on March 28, July 25, August 19, October 10, 2005, March 2, 29, and June 22, 2006. 15. USE OF ALCOHOL:

On or about March 12, 2007, the defendant ingested alcohol, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: On March 12, 2007, the defendant provided breath alcohol tests at Independence House (residential re-entry center). The tests were positive for alcohol at the following levels; .036, .033, and .019. The defendant admitted to Independence House staff member, Manny Gonzales, that he consumed four beers and two shots. On the same day, a urine specimen was collected from the defendant. The specimen tested positive for alcohol. 16. FAILURE TO PARTICIPATE IN SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT AS DIRECTED BY THE PROBATION OFFICER: The defendant failed to provide a breath alcohol test at Correctional Management Incorporated (CMI), the testing and treatment program in which the probation officer had directed him to participate, on April 29 and 30, 2007, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: The Probation Office received written notification from CMI that the defendant failed to provide a random breath test on April 29, and 30, 2007. On May 2, 2007, the defendant' girlfriend, Antoinette Abeyta, reported that the s defendant was consuming alcohol on Sunday, April 29, 2007.

Case 1:04-cr-00082-EWN

Document 59

Filed 05/04/2007

Page 6 of 6

On April 17, and 23, 2007, the Probation Officer instructed the defendant to report to CMI for daily breath tests upon his release from Independence House. The defendant released from Independence House on April 24, 2007. 17. FAILURE TO PARTICIPATE IN DRUG/ALCOHOL TREATMENT AS DIRECTED BY THE PROBATION OFFICER:

The defendant failed to attend substance abuse treatment at Correctional Management Incorporated (CMI), the substance abuse treatment program in which the probation officer had directed him to participate, on January 16, and 30, 2007, which constitutes a Grade C violation of supervised release. This charge is based on the following facts: The Probation Office received written notification that the defendant failed to attend substance abuse treatment at CMI on January 16, and 30, 2007.