United States v. Deft. 7

District Court, District of Columbia·Decided April 24, 2015·No. Criminal No. 2000-0425·Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

v. ) Criminal Action No. 00-425 (RWR)

)

HAROLD HILL, )

)

Defendant. )

______________________________)

ORDER

The Probation Office filed a petition alleging that defendant Harold Hill violated conditions of his supervised release. Magistrate Judge Alan Kay issued a report on April 8, 2015, recommending that Hill be monitored for a period of 30 days, with a curfew at the discretion of the Probation Officer. No party filed any objections to the recommendation. The recommendation is fair and just. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the report and recommendation [781] of the magistrate judge be, and hereby is, ADOPTED. The defendant shall undergo electronic monitoring for 30 days with a curfew at the discretion of the Probation Officer to meet the defendant’s work schedule. Costs of monitoring are waived.

SIGNED this 24th day of April, 2015.

/s/

RICHARD W. ROBERTS

Chief Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Deft. 7, (D.D.C. 2015).

United States v. Deft. 7 (United States v. Deft. 7) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.