United States v. Akers

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Vv.

ERNEST AKERS, Crim. Action No. 11-313 (CKK/ZMF)

Defendant.

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION On June 7, 2024, this matter was referred to a Magistrate Judge for a Hearing on Violation of Defendant Ermest Akers’ supervised release and a Report and Recommendation, Order, ECF No. 35, and pending before this Court is Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 41. Prior to issuing the Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Faruqui convened two hearings in this case, in part because the parties agreed to have the instant matter trail the underlying criminal case. In that underlying criminal case, Mr. Akers pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge and received a sentence that includes two years of probation and one hundred fifty hours of community service. Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 41, at 2. In his Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Faruqui recommends that: Mr. Akers’ reintegration since his release and subsequent misdemeanor plea has not been easy. But he has successfully done so: he works two jobs, maintains stable housing, and remains sober. These accomplishments are extraordinary. His sentence in the underlying case sufficiently punished him. And that sentence is ongoing. He will be supervised under the watchful eye of local probation officers for two years. Further detaining Mr. Akers would impose a sentence greater than necessary to fulfil public safety, deterrence, and rehabilitation goals. Such an outcome is contrary to law. See 18 U.S.C. §3553(a). Thus, the undersigned recommends a sentence of time served (i.e., the one day he was incarcerated) with no additional period of supervision. See, e.g., Nuvenze, 2024 WL 4608867, at *9-10 (sentencing defendant to time served and no additional period of supervision); United States v. Carpenter, No. 16-cr-195-ABJ, 2024 WL 4531051, at *2 n.1

1 (D.D.C. Oct. 16, 2024), report and recommendation adopted, 2024 WL 4723211 (D.D.C.

Nov. 8, 2024) (same); cf United States v. Wagner, 573 F. App’x 598, 598-599 (7th Cir.

2014) (imposing time served based on Grade B violation). This is the only sentence that

comports with the Supreme Court’s guidance that “[s]upervised release fulfills

rehabilitative ends, distinct from those served by incarceration.” United States v. Johnson,

529 U.S. 53, 59 (2000).

Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 41, at 8 (footnotes omitted).

No objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation have been received by the Court, and the Court has confirmed with the United States Probation Office for the District of Columbia that Defendant remains employed, in stable housing, and otherwise in compliance with the terms of his supervision. Accordingly, it is this 29th day of September, 2025,

ORDERED that the [41] Report and Recommendation is hereby ADOPTED. Defendant

Ernest Akers’ is sentenced to time served (i.e., the one day he was incarcerated) with no

additional period of supervision in this case.

COLLEEN Cbs Kb cre Lah

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE