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. Carter

United States District Court, E.D. California

October 30, 2019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff
v.
JACK DAVIS CARTER, Defendant

          ORDER FOR RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR EARLY TERMINATION OF SUPERVISED RELEASE (DOC. NO. 78)

         On September 16, 2019, Defendant Jack Carter filed a motion for early termination of supervised release. See Doc. No. 78.

         Background

         On October 31, 2006, Carter was sentenced to 60 months imprisonment and 180 months of supervised relieve for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), use of a facility of interstate commerce to induce a minor to engage in criminal sexual activity. See Doc. No. 31. The factual basis for Carter's crime involved his travels from Texas to California in the belief that he would be able to engage in sexual acts with two young girls. See Doc. No. 28. Carter's term of supervised release began on December 28, 2009.

         In November 2011, Carter used marijuana. See Doc. No. 34.

         In January 2012, Carter was charged with violating four terms of conditions of supervised release: (1) having unauthorized contact with a minor, (2) failing to submit written weekly and monthly report, (3) using marijuana, and (4) failing to truthfully answer questions from his probation officer. See id. In April 2012, Carter admitted violations 1, 3, and 4, see Doc. No. 46, and he was sentenced to 6 months in custody and 173 months of supervised release. See Doc. Nos. 52, 53.

         In November 2012, Carter was charged with four supervised release violations: (1) associating with a prohibited person, (2) associating with a person engaged in criminal activity, (3) failing to follow the instructions of his probation officer, and (4) ingestion of methamphetamine. See Doc. No. 55. Carter admitted all four violations, was sentenced to nine months imprisonment and 165 months of supervised release. See Doc. No. 70.

         In June 16, 2015, Carter used marijuana. See Doc. No. 75.

         In February 2017, Carter was attacked and severely beaten. See Doc. No. 78. Carter suffered intracranial hemorrhages, an orbital fracture, a mandible fracture, vertebral fractures, and had symptoms of traumatic brain injury. See id. Carter also suffers from Parkinson's disease.

         According to a letter from Dr. McClain dated September 12, 2018, she has observed significant and very concerning declines in Carter's health related to his Parkinson's disease, including recurrent falls, difficulty walking, difficulty initiating and changing movements, observable memory loss, and confusion. Dr. McClain also was looking into more supervised/assisted care options as the Parkinson's disease is progressing to the point where he will likely need 24 hour care. Currently, Dr. McClain is of the opinion that Carter should be placed in hospice care and has put in for placement in hospice. It appears that Dr. McClain is a friend of Carter, having met Carter through her husband who is a registered sex offender.

         Despite Dr. McClain's opinions regarding Carter's care, the government reports that Carter is not currently in hospice, he lives independently, and has good and bad days in terms of mental acuity.

         Legal Standard

         18 U.S.C. § 3583 inter alia permits a court to terminate a term of supervised release, after considering various factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e); United States v. Emmett, 749 F.3d 817, 819 (9th Cir. 2014). Those factors are: (1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the nature and characteristics of the defendant, see § 3553(a)(1); (2) the need for the sentence imposed to provide adequate deterrence, see § 3553(a)(2)(B); (3) the need for the sentence imposed to protect the public from further crimes by the defendant, see § 3553(a)(2)(C); (4) the need for the sentence to provide the defendant with needed educational, vocational, medical, or other correctional treatment or aide, see § 3553(a)(2)(D); (5) the kind of sentence and the sentencing range established for the applicable category of offense in the sentencing guidelines, see § 3553(a)(4); (6) any pertinent policy statement issued by the Sentencing Commission, see § 3553(a)(5); (7) the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities, see § 3553(a)(6); and (8) the need to provide restitution to any victims, see § 3553(a)(7). After considering these factors, a court may terminate supervised release “if it is satisfied that such action is warranted by the conduct of the defendant released and the interest of justice.” 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1); Emmett, 749 F.3d at 819. In considering the “interest of justice, ” the Court may also consider any “undue hardship” that the defendant might be suffering. See Emmett, 749 F.3d at 820. District courts must explain its decision to either grant or deny a motion for early termination of supervised release. See id. at 820-21.

         Defendant's Argument

         Carter argues that he was released from prison 10 years ago and has approximately 93 months of supervision remaining. He is in need of 24 hour care and his physician is of the opinion that he should be placed in hospice care. The stress caused by supervision is worsening his condition. Given his condition, Carter argues that the need for supervision to ...


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.