United States v. Howard

Opinion

CONSENT FOR MODIFICATION OF SUPERVISED RELEASE/PROBATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F I L E D for the District of Co1umbia Nov 1 8 20" Clerk, u.s. oasrricc ana Bankruptcy Courts UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) . _ ) Criminal No. §§ '<>2 ‘Q’ / vs. ) ./ /t/ t > H#/i//ZQ\ ¢//P€° 1 4 )Uaa)a/>o( ) Defendant

CONSENT TO MODIFY PROBATION/SUPERVISED RELEASE

The parties agree the defendant's conditions of supervised release/pz=obation-should be modified, and there being no objection thereto, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the defendant's

conditions of supervised release/probation be modified '

rata y

|'ll¢‘l n o ill l._n n_ '» .ln l

/)s . ‘ )/)/¢MM¢/¢t/¢@ § ,/ mut /§Jj /z/;r%z/a/>a//z mta/r1 a ,¢7»47> ?;¢zr;%izzi::é{`”’

;Qte wei Mz/ 645 o »z:iw;'#z¢/ /> %tit¢/ /»z~[>a;v@`mi/

' , , %.S. §agistrate Judge y

ated: c,»\/`[/ l£t£.{ j/ /@) Z_[); t/ Failure to file timely objections to the findings and recommendations set forth in this report may waive your right of appeal from an order of the District Court adopting such findings and recommendations. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).

r~`

/

The magistrate judge having recommended that the conditions of the defendant's supervised release/probation be modified and there being no objection thereto, IT IS ORDERED that the recommendation of the magistrate judge is accepted.

o~\k 4..¢)\._...'.--

Dated: “ h i ‘ k \ U.S. District Judge