Free Probation Form 12 - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

. ._ ....... . ........ -.. ...... .._.,.-._......-.._...-........uu2._...--. ................................._1.L_...;....................;.........;....................._....;
Form12 Case 3:00-cr-00236-CFD Document 24 Filed 06/15/2005 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT l
U.S.A. vs. DAVID PAYNE i Docket No. 3:00CR00236(CFD)
PETITION ON PROBATION AND SU ERVISED RELEASE
COMES NOW Michael E. Sheehan, SUPERVISING PROBAT OFFICER OF THE COUR'·l§;:presenting an official
report upon the conduct and attitude of DAVID PAYNE who was sent nced to 12 months imprisonmériit for arviotation of 18
U.S.C. Section 1028(a)(7), Identification Fraud, by the Honorable Christopher F. Droney, U-.S.__Distridg;ludge,_ gsitting inthe
court at Hartford, Connecticut on January 19, 2001, who fixed the period of supervision at 13 years Wltich commenced on
September 28, 2001 and imposed the general terms and conditions theretofore adopted by the`ceurt andglso im posid special
conditions and terms as follows: Pl`§>,f;E$ I it i-
l %‘_"$’?;¥-- 'U
(1) The defendant is prohibited from incurring new credit charges or op ing new additional Iinesgftcreditv\y_yhouttPH"§!{z1pproval
of the United States Probation Officer, unless the defendant is in co, pliance with the restitutitipgrrpayment schedule. The
defendant was ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $2,009.88 in monthly installments of 100; 2I;The defendant is
required to provide the United States Probation Officer access to any r guesteci financial information; and, (3) The defendant
shall participate in a mental health program approved by the Probatio (Office.
l
On April 14, 2003, the defendant appeared before the Honorable Ch stopher F. Droney in U.S. District Court at Hartford,
Connecticut to answer to the charge that he violated the conditions f his supervised release. The Court found that the
defendant had violated his supervised release and revoked supervisio . The defendant was committed to the custody of the
Bureau of Prisons for 18 months, to run concurrent to the sentence of i prisonment also imposed on that date under Docket
Number 3:O0CR00146(CFD). The Coun reimposed a term of supervi ed release of 12 months, with the original terms and
conditions, to run concurrent with the 12 month term of supervised rel (arse imposed in Docket Number 3:00CR001 46(CFD).
Mr. Payne was released from the custody of the Bureau of Prisons o June 18, 2004, at which time his supervised release
commenced in the District of Maryland. Supervision is due to expire o June 17, 2005.
RESPECTFULLY PRESENTING PETITION FOR ACTION COURT AND FOR CAUSE AS FOLLOWS:
The defendant is being cited for violating the following condition of su ervised release:
Charge No.1 Special Condition: "The defendant shall gayrestltution int e amount of 2 009.88 in 100 monthl installments?
The U.S. Probation Office in the District of Maryland has advised that etween August 2, 2004 and April 2, 2005, Mr. Payne
submitted photocopies reflecting nine payments via postal money or ers to the Clerk, U.S. District Court, in the District of
Connecticut, in the amount of $200 each ($1800 total).However, an in uiry of the Clerk’s Office in the District of Connecticut
has revealed that no payments had ever been received during the af rementioned time period. A review of their payment
ledger confirmed that no payments were received. On June 10, 2005 the U.S. Probation Office in the District of Maryland
discussed this discrepancy with Mr. Payne. He denied providing mislea ing documentation regarding his restitution payments
and was adamant that he mailed the money orders to the Clerks Office i the District of Connecticut. He seemed unconcerned
that the Clerk’s Office had not received any of his payments.
PRAYING THAT THE COURT WILL ORDER thatthis petition will serve as a summo gplling the period of supervision
and directing David Payne to appear before this court at Hartford, Connecticut on I/J.; at [49,2 to show cause why
supervision should not be revoked. if any .
ORDER OF COURT f`\ Swolrin to By _
Considered and ordered this P i PM-
day of June 2005 and ordered filed and made Mic el E. Sheehan
a part gbtpyecords Qthe above case. Sup rvising United States Probation Officer
,__, _ Plac
The`FlondrabIe Christopher F.-Droney .» ..
United States District Judge Dat 6 YA S
Before me, the Honorable Christopher F. Droney, United States Distriict Judge, on thisU<€>of Jun , 2005, at Hartford,
Supervising U.S. Probation Officer Michael E. Sheehan appeared and under oath stated thapthg facts sg forth in this petition
are true tothe best of his knowledge and belief.
The‘-l·l6n6rable'Christori}l·r·s·r··F. Droney
United States District Judge l
Z`?) :Z`]-g`:`Sg{52’;•E_;1*€?*’*{?{¥`?·'f‘>r'r°";'“*_‘·· 4 . . . .._, K
I I ``i`‘` PPP ” _ so _ __ gy _ g _
»a..¥.,§2?_a?>V_?_;______i i _ Pi _ ·i _ P-PP ‘·<: »- .; .- .1 ,__,._ )
Hs; 7* ¥;ijt?"T ~§.E&s5;§;=3lg1-$._;__i__Ei_ ?__f;_T _ _. _ U if FF P _` · *`¥* `if? "’
V; jg i `i‘i ‘ P P P P P - .....,e..,.,.s£.
....., P
` ` i```’` °” PT .... i __ . it __ g _
em · n ii i;.££_f,,, 2 _ ._ ` D` ` `" P PF P P *P*P ```P *2*
_; j { P`PP P ‘ P P P P . .....e......,..,£.