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. Brigham

United States District Court, E.D. California

May 3, 2018

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
CLIFFORD BRIGHAM, Defendant.

          McGREGOR W. SCOTT United States Attorney MICHAEL G. TIERNEY Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America

          APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR RELEASE OF MATERIAL RETAINED BY UNITED STATES PROBATION OFFICE

          LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE.

         The United States, through its attorneys McGregor W. Scott, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of California, and Michael G. Tierney, Assistant U.S. Attorney, requests that the Court authorize the release of the material (including documents and any electronic items) obtained by the United States Probation Office from the defendant's residence in or about December 2017.

         BACKGROUND

         1. Defendant Clifford Brigham was on supervised release following two convictions in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon: Case No. 02-220 and Case No. 06-272. In November and December 2017, the defendant was being supervised by the United States Probation Office for the Eastern District of California (“the Probation Office”). Among other conditions of release, the defendant was prohibited from applying for loans or credit arrangements without the permission of the Probation Office. Superseding Petition for Warrant or Summons, No. 17-cr-308, Dkt. 16 at 1-2; Superseding Petition for Warrant or Summons, No. 17-cr-309, Dkt. 16 at 1-2

         2. In approximately December 2017, members of the Probation Office conducted a search of thedefendant's residence to monitor his compliance with his terms of his supervised release.

         3. During the search, members of the Probation Office took possession of material within theresidence that related to the defendant's financial dealings. Much of the material represented hard copy documents that appeared to be generated by the defendant. It is unknown whether such documents exist in any other location or in any other format.

         4. In part due to review of the material, the Probation Office filed petitions in each of the defendant's cases alleging violations of his conditions of release. The alleged violation of Oregon Case No. 02-220 was filed in this District as Case No. 17-cr-309. The alleged violation of Oregon Case No. 06-272 was filed in this District as Case No. 17-cr-308.

         5. In addition to the supervised release violations, members of the Probation Office consulted with the United States Attorney's Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation to investigate whether the defendant committed federal criminal offenses. In approximately January 2018, the FBI opened an investigation into this matter. The investigation is ongoing.

         6. In February 2018, the defendant admitted certain violations of his supervised release in both cases. Dkt. 17 (Case No 308, 309). On April 9, 2018, the Court sentenced defendant to 36 months imprisonment on Case No. 309 and ordered the sentence to be served consecutive to 24 months imposed on Case. No. 308. Dkt. 21-22 (Case No. 308, 309). Each case is currently pending appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

         7. In order to continue its investigation, the FBI proposes to take custody of material gathered by the Probation Office during its search of the defendant's residence.

         STANDARD

         8. Local Rule 461 states that probation records “are confidential records of the United States District Court.” Disclosure is prohibited absent order of the Court. L.R. 4601(a). Requests for disclosure must be in writing and must articulate with particularity the need for specific items of information within the report. Id. at 461(b).

         9. The Administrative Office of the Court recognizes that information obtained by the Probation Office may be used in a subsequent criminal investigation. “Information or evidence gathered in the cours of a [probation] search may be used in . . . reporting serious criminal conduct to a law enforcement agency.” See Administrative Office of the Courts Overview of Probation and Supervised Release Conditions ...


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.