01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

1

 Although the original charging documents were requested from the District of Montana,

they do not appear to have been received. This information is taken from the summary report filed

by the Probation Officer.

SUMMARY REPORT OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE AS

TO ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF SUPERVISED RELEASE

PAGE -1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

WALLENE MARY BEAR,

Defendant.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. CR06-188-RSM

SUMMARY REPORT OF U.S.

MAGISTRATE JUDGE AS TO 

ALLEGED VIOLATIONS

OF SUPERVISED RELEASE

An evidentiary hearing on supervised release revocation in this case was scheduled before

me on June 11 , 2008. The United States was represented by AUSA Mary Dimke and the

defendant by Jennifer Wellman. The proceedings were digitally recorded.

Defendant had been sentenced in the District of Montana on or about October 14, 2004

by the Honorable Sam E. Hadden on a charge of Possession with Intent to Distribute

Methamphetamine, and sentenced to 24 months custody, 3 years supervised release.1

 Jurisdiction

Case 2:06-cr-00188-RSM Document 24 Filed 06/11/08 Page 1 of 3
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22 2 Cf. Fn. 1.

SUMMARY REPORT OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE AS

TO ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF SUPERVISED RELEASE

PAGE -2

was transferred to this District on June 5, 2006. (Dkt. 1.)

The conditions of supervised release included the standard conditions plus the requirements

that defendant be prohibited from possessing a firearm, submit to search, abstain from consuming

alcohol and be prohibited from entering establishments where alcohol is the primary item of sale,

and participate in electronic monitoring for up to 120 days. 2

On July 13, 2006, defendant’s probation officer alleged that defendant had violated the

conditions of supervision by using cocaine. Defendant was reprimanded, put in a structured

testing program with increased frequency of testing, and referred for intensive outpatient

treatment. (Dkt. 3.)

On May 9, 2007, defendant’s probation officer alleged that defendant had violated the

conditions of supervision by using marijuana. Defendant was reprimanded and referred to

counseling. (Dkt. 4.)

On July 11, 2007, defendant’s probation officer alleged that defendant had violated the

conditions of supervision by using methamphetamine. Defendant was referred to a community

based residential program and referred for intensive outpatient treatment. (Dkt. 5.)

On February 14, 2008, defendant admitted violating the conditions of supervision by using

methamphetamine and cocaine. (Dkt. 10). On February 25, 2008, defendant’s probation officer

filed a report indicating that defendant had further violated the conditions of supervision by using

marijuana and cocaine. The alleged violations were incorporated into pending revocation

proceedings. (Dkt. 13.) Defendant was continued on supervised release with the additional

Case 2:06-cr-00188-RSM Document 24 Filed 06/11/08 Page 2 of 3
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

SUMMARY REPORT OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE AS

TO ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF SUPERVISED RELEASE

PAGE -3

requirement of participation in an electronic monitoring program for up to 120 days. (Dkt. 15.)

In an application dated May 19, 2008 (Dkt. 17, as amended), U.S. Probation Officer Joe

Mendez alleged the following violations of the conditions of supervised release:

1. Using cocaine on or before March 17, 2008, in violation of standard condition 7.

2. Using cocaine on or before April 15, 2008, in violation of standard condition 7.

Defendant was advised in full as to those charges and as to her constitutional rights.

The parties submitted a Stipulation of Facts for Evidentiary Hearing, which was admitted

into evidence. (Dkt. 22.) Based on the stipulation, I find that, by a preponderance of the evidence,

the defendant used cocaine on or before March 17, 2008 and on or before April 15, 2008.

I therefore recommend the Court find defendant violated her supervised release as alleged,

and that the Court conduct a hearing limited to the issue of disposition. The next hearing will be

set before Judge Martinez.

Pending a final determination by the Court, defendant has been detained.

DATED this 11th day of June, 2008.

A

Mary Alice Theiler

United States Magistrate Judge

cc: District Judge: Honorable Ricardo S. Martinez

AUSA: Mary Dimke

Defendant’s attorney: Jennifer Wellman

Probation officer: Joe Mendez

Case 2:06-cr-00188-RSM Document 24 Filed 06/11/08 Page 3 of 3