The opinion of the court was delivered by: James V. Selna, U. S. District Judge
JUDGMENT AND PROBATION/COMMITMENT ORDER
In the presence of the attorney for the government, the defendant appeared in person on this date. APRIL 26 2010
X WITH COUNSEL Dan Marmalefsky, retained
X GUILTY, and the court being satisfied that there is a factual basis for the plea. NOLO
There being a finding/verdict of X GUILTY, defendant has been convicted as charged of the offense(s) of: Subscribing to False Income Tax Returns in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1) as charged in the Single Count Information.
The Court asked whether there was any reason why judgment should not be pronounced. Because no sufficient cause to the contrary was shown, or appeared to the Court, the Court adjudged the defendant guilty as charged and convicted and ordered that: Pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, it is the judgment of the Court that the defendant is hereby Placed on Probation for a term of Two (2) Years on the Single Count Information.
It is ordered that the defendant shall pay to the United States a special assessment of $100.00, which is
All fines are waived as it is found that such sanction would place an undue burden on the defendant's
The term of Probation shall be served under the following terms and conditions: The defendant shall comply with the rules and regulations of the U. S. Probation Office and General Order 318;
During the period of community supervision the defendant shall pay the special assessment and fine in accordance with this judgment's orders pertaining to such payment;
The defendant shall cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample from the defendant;
The defendant shall participate for a period of six (6) months in a home detention program which may include electronic monitoring, GPS, Alcohol Monitoring Unit or automated identification systems and shall observe all rules of such program, as directed by the Probation Officer. The defendant shall maintain a residential telephone line without devices and/or services that may interrupt operation of the monitoring equipment. Defendant shall be permitted to undertake his care responsibilities for his parents and to attend regular religious services; The defendant shall pay the costs of home confinement monitoring to the contract vendor, not to exceed the sum of $12.00 for each day of participation in the electronic monitoring, GPS, and/or voice recognition program. The defendant shall provide payment and proof of payments as directed by the Probation Officer;
The defendant shall participate in mental health treatment, which may include evaluation and counseling, until discharged from the treatment by the treatment provider, with the approval of the Probation Officer;
As directed by the Probation Officer, the defendant shall pay all or part of the costs of treating the defendant's mental health treatment to the aftercare contractor during the period of community supervision, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3672. The defendant shall provide payment and proof of payment as directed by the Probation Officer;
The defendant shall perform 100 hours of community service, as directed by the Probation Officer;
The defendant shall truthfully and timely file and pay taxes owed for the years of conviction; and shall truthfully and timely file and pay taxes during the period of community supervision. Further, the defendant shall show proof to the Probation Officer of compliance with this order;
Within 30 days of sentencing, defendant shall notify the department of insurance, in all states in which he is licensed, of this conviction and provide proof to the Probation Officer of compliance with this order.
The Court authorizes the Probation Officer to disclose the Presentence Report, and/or any previous mental health evaluations or reports, to the treatment provider. The treatment provider may provide information (excluding the Presentence Report), to State or local social service agencies (such as the State of California, Department of Social Services), for the purpose of the client's rehabilitation.
The drug testing condition mandated by statute is suspended based on the Court's determination that the defendant poses a ...