United States v. Deft. 7

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia
DecidedApril 24, 2015
DocketCriminal No. 2000-0425
StatusPublished

This text of United States v. Deft. 7 (United States v. Deft. 7) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

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

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Deft. 7, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-deft-7-dcd-2015.