Tuesday, January 03, 2012

U.S. v. Reeves, 2011 WL 6145343 (12/12/11) (Col.) (unpub'd) - The probation officer was not improperly vindictive where, after the defendant challenged the terms of his proposed sex offender treatment contract submitted pursuant to a motion to modify supervised release conditions, the officer withdrew the modification motion and filed a motion to revoke supervised release based on a misdemeanor offense that the defendant committed prior to when the motion to modify was filed. The defendant ended up with a 10-month sentence. The 10th saw these series of events as akin to plea negotiations. A prosecutor has the right to file charges if negotiations are not going the way the prosecutor wants them to. And to top it off, the defendant's challenge to the sex offender contract was not ripe because the district court's sentence only imposed mandatory sex offender treatment, not the specific contract to which the defendant objected.