Free Sealed Document - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:04-cr-00082-EWN

Document 42

Filed 11/20/2006

Page 1 of 5

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. 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 20th day of November, 2006, 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 U.S. District Judge Place: Denver, Colorado November 17, 2006

Case 1:04-cr-00082-EWN

Document 42
ATTACHMENT

Filed 11/20/2006

Page 2 of 5

Attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference is a true copy of the Conditions of Supervised Release signed by the defendant on January 21, 2005, acknowledging that the conditions have 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 Department 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 Department 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 Department 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.

Document 42

Filed 11/20/2006

Page 3 of 5

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. 5. 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. 6. 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. This charge is based on the following facts: 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. 7. 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.

Case 1:04-cr-00082-EWN 8.

Document 42

Filed 11/20/2006

Page 4 of 5

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 Department received written notification from CMI that the defendant failed to provide a random urine specimen on October 5, and 22, 2006. 9. 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 Department received written notification from ARTS that the defendant failed to provide a random urine specimen on April 11, and June 29, 2006. 10. 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 Department received written notification that the defendant failed to attend substance abuse treatment at CMI on October 4, and November 13, 2006. 11. 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 Department 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.

Case 1:04-cr-00082-EWN 12.

Document 42

Filed 11/20/2006

Page 5 of 5

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 Department 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.