Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Emmanuel

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

April 9, 2018

United States of America, Plaintiff,
v.
Moses Richard Emmanuel, Defendant.

          OPINION AND ORDER FINDING DEFENDANT TO HAVE VIOLATED THE CONDITIONS OF HIS SUPERVISED RELEASE AND ORDERING HIM DETAINED PENDING SENTENCING

          Sean F. Cox United States District Judge

         The Court has held a supervised release violation hearing in this case. For the reasons below, the Court concludes that the Government has established, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Defendant committed a Grade A violation of supervised release.

         BACKGROUND

         Defendant Moses Richard Emmanuel previously pleaded guilty before this Court to counterfeiting and forging obligations or securities, 18 U.S.C. § 471. On May 17, 2012, the Court sentenced him to 46 months in prison, followed by three years of supervised release (Doc. # 17). The Court imposed the standard conditions of supervision and some special conditions.

         Defendant's supervised release began on April 24, 2015 and was set to expire this month, on April 23, 2018. But, on November 27, 2017, Defendant's probation officer filed a Petition for Warrant, alleging that Defendant had violated several conditions of his supervised release. The Court issued the warrant on December 6, 2017 (Doc. # 20). Probation has since filed an amended petition, which the Court has signed (Doc. # 33). The Amended Petition alleges the following violations of Defendant's supervised release:

• (1) “Violation of Mandatory Condition: You shall not commit another federal, state or local crime.”
• (2) “Violation of Mandatory Condition: You shall not commit another federal, state or local crime.”
• (3) “Violation of Standard Condition No. 11: The Defendant shall notify the probation officer within seventy-two hours of being arrested or questioned by a law enforcement officer.”
• (4) “Violation of Special Condition No. 4: The Defendant shall be lawfully and gainfully employed on a full-time basis. ‘Full time' is defined as 40 hours per week.”
• (5) “Violation of Standard Condition No. 6: The Defendant shall notify the probation officer at least ten days prior to any change in residence or employment.”

         Defendant admitted the third violation and denied the remainder. The Court held an evidentiary hearing on the alleged violations on March 14, 2018 and April 4, 2018. At the hearing, the Government presented three witnesses: Bloomfield Township Police Officer Brian Kaschyk, United States Secret Service Special Agent William Schulz, and Detroit Police Detective Terry Cross-Nelson. The Government also introduced fifteen exhibits. Defendant called one witness: Steven A. Mason, an investigator with the Federal Defender's Office. Defendant also introduced one exhibit.

         Having heard and observed the witnesses who testified at the evidentiary hearing, allowing for the Court to assess credibility, having considered the exhibits submitted by the parties, having considered the arguments presented by counsel, and having applied the governing legal principles, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law.[1]

         FINDINGS OF FACT

         To begin, the Court finds the testimony of the Government's witnesses to be credible and reliable. Their testimony, the foundation for these findings of fact, was consistent and supported by corroborating evidence. Also, as stated at the hearing, the Court further finds that the hearsay statements by various retail store employees, introduced through the testimony of the Government's witnesses, are sufficiently reliable. See United States v. Williams, 214 Fed. App'x. 552, 555 (6th Cir. 2007) (“It is well-settled that hearsay may be considered in a supervised release revocation hearing if it is shown to be reliable.”). Those statements were made contemporaneously with the events they described and there is no indication that the declarants had any motive to lie or that their testimony was otherwise unreliable.

         Turning to the facts at hand, the primary violation alleged originates in a Secret Service counterfeit investigation beginning in 2017. On January 12, 2017, Defendant's girlfriend, Kanesha Hollins, went to Rubber Stamps Unlimited in Plymouth, Michigan. Using an alias, she ordered a stamp containing a portrait of Ulysses S. Grant. The portrait is similar to that which appears on genuine $50 currency. The next day, Hollins returned to the store, arriving in a black Chrysler 300 that was registered to Defendant, and picked up her order.[2]

         Two months later, an unidentified male customer identifying himself as “Zayon” went to Rubber Stamps, arriving in a Cadillac Escalade registered to Defendant. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.