Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-1_06-cr-00063/USCOURTS-almd-1_06-cr-00063-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Reginald Randall Glanton
Defendant
USA
Plaintiff

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) 1:06-CR-63-MEF-DRB

) WO

REGINALD RANDALL GLANTON )

ORDER OF REVOCATION AND PRETRIAL DETENTION

At the scheduled revocation hearing on the petition for revocation of the defendant’s

pretrial release supervision (Doc. 15), Defendant Reginald Randall Glanton (“Glanton”), by his

appointed counsel, Assistant Federal Defender Kevin Butler, admitted each of the two violations

alleged and stipulated that the government’s evidence would be sufficient to establish his

noncompliance with Condition 7a (“The defendant shall report to Pretrial Services, Middle District of

Alabama as directed by the Pretrial Services Officer.”)

 The undersigned court imposed Condition 7a and other pretrial release conditions, in its

Order releasing Glanton on March 14, 2006, following his arrest on a March 1, 2006, indictment

charging him, a convicted felon, with being in possession of a firearm; his trial was scheduled before

Chief Judge Mark Fuller initially on September 11, 2006, and continued to September 18, 2006.

Trial remains pending as Glanton was not located and arrested until September 18, 2006. 

 Notwithstanding his admission on the asserted violations, Glanton maintained that pretrial

release conditions could be fashioned which would ensure his compliance with release conditions and

his appearance in court as required, as there is no contention that he poses a danger to the

community. Accordingly, the court received defense testimony fromLaWanda Glenn, a 24 year- old

Dothan resident who described herself as Glanton’s girlfriend (“Glenn”), and from Janie Glanton,

the defendant’s 37 year-old sister, also a Dothan resident. The United States solicited the testimony

of Probation Officer Louis D. Johns. After due consideration of all relevant testimony, the court

concludes, and now explains, that revocation and detention are warranted.

Case 1:06-cr-00063-MEF-WC Document 26 Filed 09/26/06 Page 1 of 3
2

I.

FINDINGS

1. By his own admissions, Defendant Glanton has violated – in two respects – the

condition 7a requirement that he report to his pretrial services officer as directed: (1) failing

to report changes in his residence, and (2) failing to report to his pretrial services officer weekly by

telephone.

2. The evidence fails to establish that Defendant’s proffered conditions for pretrial

release – residence with his girlfriend, third party custodial supervision by his girlfriend and

sister, full-time work, and drug tests three times weekly – would reasonably ensure his

compliance with all pretrial release conditions and his appearance in court as required.

Glanton assumes responsibility for the violations but no evidence suggests any reasonable

explanation for his refusal either to maintain weekly contacts with his probation officer since March

27, 2006, or to report changes in his residence. If he maintained work with a landscaping company

in Dothan, as represented by his witnesses, his neglect to make the weekly telephone calls is

especially curious and tends to raise doubts about the claim of employment. The court finds

credible the probation officer’s account of his diligent efforts to locate Glanton in July and discredits

suggestions that Glanton never received messages left for him at his mother’s residence in Abbeville

and at his sister’s residence in Dothan.

Glanton’s positive testing for marijuana in May, while not asserted as a violation, cannot be

ignored as he was advised that another test would be given in three weeks; indeed, it is reasonable

to assume that this notice of re-testing factored in his failure to maintain contacts with his pretrial

services officer.

Neither Glenn’s testimony nor her willingness to serve as a third-party custodian merits much

weight. While describing herself as Glanton’s girlfriend for the past seven months, she acknowledged

that he stayed with her only “off and on” and that he had not honestly shared with her the facts of

his indictment and pretrial release conditions. Neither her status as Glanton’s girlfriend nor his

Case 1:06-cr-00063-MEF-WC Document 26 Filed 09/26/06 Page 2 of 3
3

residence with her even occasionally had been communicated to Probation Officer Johns, whose

efforts to locate Glanton resulted in information from his mother and sister about his possible

whereabouts; no one identified Glenn and another woman named “Stacey” made phone contacts on

behalf of Glanton, describing herself to Officer Johns as Glanton’s girlfriend. Glenn’s work shift –

from 10 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. at a Chevron station on the Montgomery highway – makes her an

unreliable candidate for his third-party supervision.

Glanton’s sister Janice drives about 45 minutes from her Dothan home to work at a north

Florida nursing home, for a 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. daily shift. Her testimony underscored the

defendant’s failure to keep her apprised of his pending criminal case, her knowledge of his girlfriend

Stacey, and her inability – notwithstanding her represented willingness – to be an effective thirdparty custodian.

Finally, the court cannot ignore in its consideration of detention the “record” fact of the

defendant’s failure to communicate with his own counsel in preparation for the trial, which

ultimately had to be continued generally pending his location. (See Motion to Vacate Trial Date, Doc.

18, Aug. 18, 2006)

II.

DETENTION ORDER

Pursuantto the foregoing findings and conclusions, and after due consideration of the factors

set forth in 18 U.S.C. 3142(g it is ORDERED that, for good cause shown, the Petition, docketed as

a Motion for revocation of pretrial release supervision, is GRANTED, and the defendant, Reginald

Randall Glanton, is hereby REMANDED to the custody of the United States Marshal for detention

pending trial or other further proceedings on the Indictment.

Done this 26 day of September, 2006. th

/s/ Delores R. Boyd

DELORES R. BOYD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cr-00063-MEF-WC Document 26 Filed 09/26/06 Page 3 of 3