US v. Reed
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RACHEL REED, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (7:05-cr-00079-SGW)
February 23, 2007
March 15, 2007
Before TRAXLER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William H. Cleaveland, WILLIAM H. CLEAVELAND, P.L.C., Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellant. John L. Brownlee, United States Attorney, C. Patrick Hogeboom, III, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Rachel Reed appeals from the revocation of her supervised release and her twenty-four month sentence. Reed pled guilty to
knowingly converting and aiding and abetting the conversion of government money in an amount exceeding $1000 pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 641 and 642 in 2003 and was sentenced to twenty-four months of probation, including fifteen months on electronic
She was also ordered to pay approximately $23,800 in On April 25, 2006, Reed was charged with violating
her probation by participating in a conspiracy to defraud the Alliance Housing Assistance Program (AHAP). Reed admitted to
federal authorities that she performed acts in furtherance of the conspiracy with her boyfriend, James Bush, and issued a signed statement as to the extent of her involvement. At her revocation
hearing, Bush testified on Reed's behalf, denying her involvement in the conspiracy. Fifth Amendment After giving this testimony, Bush invoked his against self-incrimination court and refused Reed
violated her probation, revoked her probation and sentenced her to twenty-four months in prison. The district court has broad discretion to revoke United
probation if a condition of probation has been violated. States v. Cates, 402 F.2d 473, 474 (4th Cir. 1968).
district court need only be reasonably satisfied that the terms of
- 2 -
release were violated.
We conclude that there was sufficient
evidence, including Reed's own admissions, to support the district court's conclusion that Reed violated her probation through her involvement in a conspiracy to defraud the Alliance Housing
Moreover, we conclude that the district court
did not abuse its discretion when it declined to find Bush's statements given on direct examination credible, considering Bush invoked his right against self-incrimination only on
cross-examination. 322 (1999).
See Mitchell v. United States, 526 U.S. 314,
Accordingly, revoking Reed's
sentence. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
- 3 -
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?