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. Osborn

August 15, 2006

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PLAINTIFF
v.
TERRANCE OSBORN DEFENDANT



ORDER

Defendant has filed a motion for modification of his conditions of release (docket entry #425) to change the third party custodian and residence. The United States has responded, opposing the motion (docket entry #428). Following a hearing, the Court denies the motion.

The proposed new third party custodian, Terry McCurn, has a criminal history. Although no felony convictions were found, he has a history of offenses such as public intoxication, non-aggravated assault, driving under the influence and welfare fraud. Although these offenses occurred years ago, Mr. McCurn was convicted on a guilty plea of terroristic threatening in 2004, for which he was fined. Further, the United States introduced evidence establishing probable cause to believe that Mr. McCurn recently sold a small quantity of cocaine to a confidential informant. In short, Mr. McCurn would not be a suitable third party custodian.

The Court did take into account the fact that the current custodian, Defendant's grandfather, smokes, which allegedly aggravates Defendant's condition of asthma. It also appears that he is less than happy to continue to serve as third party custodian. However, at this point, the only alternative to continued custody with the grandfather would be detention, and Defendant agrees that he would prefer to remain where he is.

The United States presented testimony that ongoing investigation has revealed that Defendant continues in illegal drug activity. However, the only issue properly before the Court at this point is the motion for change of custody. If the United States desires to attempt to have the Court revoke release, a motion would be necessary. Defendant is, of course, entitled to notice and a hearing as to any such allegations.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 15th day of August, 2006.

20060815

© 1992-2006 VersusLaw ...

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.