Court Opinion

ID: 2964255
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:22:53.110312+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:00:18.995068
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

        September 6, 1996       [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________

        No. 96-1093

                                    UNITED STATES,

                                      Appellee,

                                          v.

                                 MICHAEL A. CROOKER,

                                Defendant, Appellant.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                     [Hon. Joseph L. Tauro, U.S. District Judge]
                                            ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________
                            Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
                                           ______________

                                 ____________________

            Owen S. Walker, Federal Defender Office, on brief for appellant.
            ______________
            Donald K.  Stern,  United States  Attorney, and  Ariane D.  Vuono,
            ________________                                 ________________
        Assistant U.S. Attorney, on brief for appellee.

                                 ____________________

                                 ____________________

                      Per Curiam.   Michael A. Crooker,  who is currently
                      __________

            serving  a  96-month term  of  imprisonment,  appeals from  a

            district  court order denying his motion to delete or amend a

            special  condition  of supervised  release  requiring him  to

            comply with the requirements  of the Internal Revenue Service

            (I.R.S).  We think that Crooker's concern that  the condition

            is  too vague is premature.   Crooker's probation officer has

            indicated that the I.R.S.  will contact Crooker directly with

            its  requirements and  instructions.   Cf.  United States  v.
                                                   ___  _____________

            Gallo,  20 F.3d  7, 12  (1st Cir.  1994) (observing  that the
            _____

            notification  process is not  limited to the  four corners of

            the  probation order,  and that  the meaning  of a  probation

            order  may  be illuminated  by  the  judge's statements,  the

            probation officer's instructions, or other events, any or all

            of which may assist  in completing the notification process).

            Should  the I.R.S. fail to do so on or about the time Crooker

            is  released--or   should   the  instructions   be   unclear,

            incomplete, or  otherwise leave  any  of Crooker's  questions

            unanswered--Crooker  may  seek  further   clarification  from

            Probation  or from  the district  court.   Similarly, Crooker

            may, at that  time, bring  to the attention  of the  district

            court   any   concern  that   the  I.R.S.   instructions  are

            inconsistent  with the  plea agreement  or with  the district

            court's intent at sentencing.  

                      Affirmed.  See Loc. R. 27.1.
                      _________  ___

                                         -2-