823 F.2d 549 (4th Cir. 1987), 86-5673, U.S. v. Lovern
|Citation:||823 F.2d 549|
|Party Name:||UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. W. Michael LOVERN, Defendant-Appellant.|
|Case Date:||July 01, 1987|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit|
This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA4 Rule 36 regarding use of unpublished opinions)
Argued April 9, 1987.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert R. Merhige, Jr., United States District Judge. (CR-82-23-R).
Louis Withers Kershner for appellant.
William Graham Otis, Assistant United States Attorney (Henry E. Hudson, United States Attorney, on brief), for appellee.
Before HALL, SPROUSE and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.
W. Michael Lovern appeals from the district court's order revoking his probation. Lovern contends that the district court's bias at his probation hearing denied him due process. He also contends that the district court abused its discretion in revoking his probation. 1 Finding no merit to either contention, we affirm.
In 1982, a jury convicted Lovern of aiding and abetting the making of a false entry in bank records, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 1005. The court sentenced him to three years in prison, which it then suspended in favor of five years probation. 2
In July 1986, Lovern's probation officer filed a 'petition for probation action' and requested a probation revocation hearing. He charged Lovern with numerous probation violations, i.e., (1) having no job, (2) leaving the jurisdiction without permission, (3) failing to notify the probation officer of his address, (4) ignoring instructions concerning the filing of monthly reports, (5) failing to file monthly reports, (6) verbally threatening an FBI agent, and (7) falsely representing that he was employed by named employers.
The district court held a revocation hearing in November 1986. Lovern was represented by counsel and pleaded guilty to charges one, three and five. After hearing arguments and testimony, the district court concluded that Lovern had also violated charges six and seven. 3 The court then revoked Lovern's probation and sentenced him to the original three-year prison term. It also ordered the Bureau of Prisons to examine him...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP