Free Petition/Order Modifying Conditions of Supervision - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:01-cr-00351-EWN
PROB 12 (11/01-D/CO)

Document 80

Filed 07/05/2007

Page 1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO U. S. A. vs. ZACHARIAH DAVID TESSLER Docket Number: 01-cr-00351-EWN-01

Petition on Probation and Supervised Release COMES NOW, Patrick J. Lynch, probation officer of the court, presenting an official report upon the conduct and attitude of Zachariah David Tessler who was placed on supervision by the Honorable Edward W. Nottingham sitting in the court at Denver, Colorado, on the 6th day of September, 2002, 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 be placed on home detention for a period of 12 months to commence within 21 days of sentencing. During this time, the defendant shall remain at defendant' place of residence except for s employment and other activities approved in advance by the probation officer. The defendant shall maintain a telephone at defendant' place of residence without any special services, modems, answering s machines, or cordless telephones for the above period. The defendant shall wear an electronic device and shall observe the rules specified by the Probation Department. The defendant will be required to pay the cost of electronic monitoring as directed by the probation officer. The defendant shall participate in an approved program of sex offender evaluation and mental health treatment, which may include polygraph and plethysmograph examinations, as directed by the probation officer. The defendant will be required to pay the cost of treatment as directed by the probation officer. The Court authorizes the probation officer to release psychological reports and/or the presentence report to the treatment agency for continuity of treatment. The defendant shall not access any Internet sites that contain child pornography, i.e. sexually explicit material depicting minors. The defendant shall not communicate via computer, or otherwise, with any person that defendant has reason to believe is a minor concerning anything relating to child pornography or sexual activity involving minors. The defendant shall allow the probation officer to make periodic, unannounced examinations at any reasonable time of any computer or Internet access device used by him, except a computer owned by the defendant's employer and not located at the defendant's residence. Defendant shall, upon demand, immediately provide the probation officer with any password required to access data or programs on such computers or devices and shall allow the probation officer to copy information which the probation officer believes may be evidence of a law violation or a technical violation of a condition of probation. The defendant shall allow the probation officer to install site-blocking software deemed appropriate by the probation officer on any computer used by him, except a computer owned by his employer and not located at the defendant's residence. The defendant shall not attempt to remove or otherwise defeat the site-blocking system installed by the probation officer. The defendant shall not have any unsupervised contact with any person under the age of 18.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Case 1:01-cr-00351-EWN
PROB 12 (11/01-D/CO)

Document 80

Filed 07/05/2007

Page 2 of 5

On November 4, 2003, the defendant' probation was modified to include the following special condition: s 7. 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. The defendant will be required to pay the cost of treatment as directed by the probation officer.

On April 6, 2004, the defendant' probation was modified to include the following special condition: s 8. The defendant shall reside in a community corrections center for a period of four (4) months to commence within 21 days of modification, and shall observe the rules of that facility.

On March 10, 2005, the defendant' probation was extended for two (2) years based on violations of s probation. The following condition was also added: 9. The defendant will register as a sex offender in any state where the defendant resides, is employed, carries a vocation or is a student.

RESPECTFULLY PRESENTING PETITION FOR ACTION OF COURT FOR CAUSE AS FOLLOWS:
(If short insert here: if lengthy write on separate sheet and attach)

See attachment herein and hereto incorporated by reference. PRAYING THAT THE COURT WILL ORDER the issuance of a summons for the defendant to appear at a probation violation hearing. ORDER OF THE COURT Considered and ordered this 5th day of July, 2007, and ordered filed and made a part of the record in the above case. Respectfully, s/Patrick J. Lynch Patrick J. Lynch Senior U.S. Probation Officer Place: Denver, Colorado Date: June 28, 2007

s/ Edward W. Nottingham Edward W. Nottingham Chief U. S. District Judge

Case 1:01-cr-00351-EWN

Document 80

Filed 07/05/2007

Page 3 of 5

ATTACHMENT On March 10, 2005, the conditions of probation were read and explained to the defendant. On that date, he acknowledged in writing that the conditions had been read to him, that he fully understood the conditions, and that he was provided a copy of them. The extended term of probation commenced on March 10, 2005. The defendant has committed the following violations of probation: 1. POSSESSION AND USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE:

On or about October 10, 2005, the defendant used or administered a controlled substance, marijuana, which had not been prescribed for him by a physician, which constitutes a Grade C violation of probation. This charge is based on the following facts: On October 14, 2005, I was notified by ARTS/Crosspoint that a urine sample submitted by the defendant on October 10, 2005, tested positive for marijuana. I confronted defendant with these results on October 20, 2005, and he admitted smoking " about one joint"of marijuana on October 7, 2005. As a result of the defendant actions, he was placed in a Shared Living Arrangement (SLA) through Redirecting Sexual Aggression (RSA) in lieu of being unsuccessfully terminated from their sex offender treatment program. The defendant entered the SLA on November 7, 2005, and remained in that setting for ninety (90) days. 2. POSSESSION AND USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE:

On or about May 7, 2007, the defendant used or administered a controlled substance, marijuana, which had not been prescribed for him by a physician, which constitutes a Grade C violation of probation. This charge is based on the following facts: On May 18, 2007, I was notified by Correctional Management Inc. (CMI), that a urine sample submitted by the defendant on May 7, 2007, returned positive for the presence of marijuana. I confronted defendant with these results on May 30, 2007, and he readily admitted to having smoked marijuana. The defendant stated he purchased $20 worth of marijuana at Civic Center Park on May 1, 2007, and had been smoking marijuana " almost daily"from that date until May 16, 2007. 3. POSSESSION AND USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE:

On or about May 14, 2007, the defendant used or administered a controlled substance, marijuana, which had not been prescribed for him by a physician, which constitutes a Grade C violation of probation. This charge is based on the following facts: On May 17, 2007, I was notified by CMI that a urine sample submitted by the defendant on May 14, 2007, returned positive for the presence of marijuana.

Case 1:01-cr-00351-EWN

Document 80

Filed 07/05/2007

Page 4 of 5

I confronted defendant with these results on May 30, 2007, and he readily admitted to having smoked marijuana. The defendant stated he purchased $20 worth of marijuana at Civic Center Park on May 1, 2007, and had been smoking marijuana " almost daily"from that date until May 16, 2007. As a result of the defendant' use of marijuana as noted in Counts 2 and 3 of this petition, RSA again staffed the s defendant' status to determine if he would be unsuccessfully terminated from sex offender treatment. On s June 5, 2007, RSA contacted me and reported the treatment team elected to not terminate the defendant from their sex offender treatment program. However, they proposed increasing containment of the defendant by placing him in their tracking program which will require advanced approval from RSA prior to the defendant going to any locations within the community. In addition, the defendant was required to attend a Decision Making Group on a weekly basis; his group therapy sessions were increased to weekly and his individual therapy sessions remained monthly. 4. POSSESSION AND USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE:

On or about June 17, 2007, the defendant used or administered a controlled substance, marijuana, which had not been prescribed for him by a physician, which constitutes a Grade C violation of probation. This charge is based on the following facts: On June 25, 2007, I was notified by CMI that a urine sample submitted by the defendant on June 17, 2007, returned positive for the presence of marijuana. I confronted the defendant with these results on June 27, 2007, in the presence of Melissa Gursky, Clinical Director, RSA, and a sign language interpreter. The defendant initially denied having used marijuana since May 16, 2007, but then admitted to smoking marijuana on June 13, 2007. The defendant reported he " found a small piece of a joint in the grass in his backyard and I smoked it." The defendant stated he has been experiencing difficulties sleeping at night for a long time and feels marijuana has " sleeping properties in it." The defendant was admonished for his behavior and told a petition would be prepared requesting a summons for his return to court for a probation violation hearing. The defendant was also informed by RSA that effective June 26, 2007, he had been unsuccessfully terminated from sex offender treatment at RSA. I told the defendant that he continues to be subject to all other terms and conditions of his probation. The defendant was given two (2) additional opportunities to disclose any further use of marijuana and he denied, both occasions, of having smoked or used marijuana, in any fashion, since June 13, 2007. The defendant' mother, s wife, and private substance abuse therapist, Mr. Jack Mummy, were informed of the defendant' latest use of s marijuana. 5. FAILURE TO PARTICIPATE IN SEX OFFENDER TREATMENT, AS DIRECTED BY THE PROBATION OFFICER:

On June 26, 2007, I was notified by RSA that based on defendant' latest positive test for marijuana he would be s unsuccessfully terminated from their program, which constitutes a Grade C violation of probation. This charge is based on the following facts: On September 6, 2002, the defendant was sentenced to three (3) years probation with special conditions that included the requirement that he participate in sex offender treatment. On September 9, 2002, Senior Probation

Case 1:01-cr-00351-EWN

Document 80

Filed 07/05/2007

Page 5 of 5

Officer Christopher J. Perez, met with the defendant and informed him of his obligation to participate in sex offender treatment. The defendant was referred to RSA, which offered sex offender treatment for the hearing impaired. On June 29, 2003, the defendant was placed on a 90-day probationary treatment contact at RSA after failing three successive monitoring polygraphs (January 2, 2003, April 1, 2003, and May 27, 2003). Of concern was the examiner' observation that the defendant attempted to employ test circumvention techniques during the May 27, s 2003, polygraph. The defendant' sex offender therapist, Melissa Gursky, and Senior Probation Officer Perez met with the s defendant several times to discuss his failed polygraphs and encourage him to be truthful during the examinations. On June 19, 2003, the defendant disclosed to his therapist that he had been accessing the Internet in circumvention of his sex offender treatment program contract; that he had viewed adult pornography on " payper-view"television with his wife; and that he had been smoking marijuana on a daily basis since entering sex offender treatment. Based on his admissions, the defendant' sex offender treatment regimen was increased and on June 23, 2003, s the defendant was directed to undergo a substance abuse evaluation at his own expense. On April 6, 2004, the court modified the defendant' conditions of probation to include his placement at a s community corrections center for four (4) months based on violations of probation that included continued use of marijuana. On March 10, 2005, the defendant' period of probation was extended for two (2) years based on violations that s included continued use of marijuana. As a result of the defendant' use of marijuana as noted in Counts 2 and 3 of this petition, RSA again staffed the s defendant' case to determine if he would be unsuccessfully terminated from sex offender treatment. On s June 5, 2007, RSA contacted me and reported the treatment team elected to not terminate the defendant from their sex offender treatment program. However, they proposed increasing containment of the defendant by placing him in their tracking program which requires advance approval from RSA prior to the defendant going to any locations within the community. In addition, the defendant was required to attend a Decision Making Group on a weekly basis and he is currently on the waiting list for this additional therapy. The defendant' group s therapy sessions were increased to weekly and his individual sessions remain monthly. On June 26, 2007, I contacted defendant' sex offender treatment therapist, Melissa Gursky, and she reported s their treatment team unsuccessfully terminated from RSA based on his continued use of marijuana. I met in person with the defendant at RSA, along with Melissa Gursky and a sign language interpreter, at which time the defendant admitted to having smoked marijuana on June 13, 2006. As a result, the defendant was informed he had been unsuccessfully terminated from sex offender treatment at RSA, effective June 26, 2007.