I Case Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/27/2007 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 05-80006 TP MIDDLEBROOKS I, so 93 5 . UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, :53 E: 3 kg Plaintiff, .538 no i=3. VS. MARC Defendant(s). ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION THIS CAUSE has come before the Court upon the Defendant's Motion to Reconsider it's order of February 5, 2007, ?led February 13, 2007. On January 24, 2006, Defendant ?led a motion to modify or terminate his period of supervised release. Defendant titled the motion as "unopposed. However, Defendant clearly states in his original motion that the Government is opposed to the motion as presented by defense counsel. Defendant articulated several conditions presented by the Government before it was willing to agree to allow Defendant to remain in London (see 12, pages 11,12). Also, if those conditions were met, the Government would Simply allow Defendant to remain in London. There is no evidence that the Government is willing to agree to completely terminate supervision. The Court also notes that Defendant's proposed order was drafted to grant the motion as presented by defense counsel. It does not include any language incorporating the Govemment?s position. This is further evidence that the motion was not "unopposed." Further, Defendant contends that he has complied with his conditions of supervision for over two years. .without any Violation. (see DE 12, page 2). According to the Probation Case Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/27/2007 Page 2 of 2 Of?cer and Defendant's own admission, Defendant has not fully complied with his conditions of supervision. Defendant has yet to submit a DNA sample to Probation. This is a mandatory condition of supervision. Also, Defendant has been in London for two years virtually unsupervised. This is a concern to the Government, to Probation, and to this Court. The Court recognizes that Defendant may be in need of further medical care before he can return to the United States. However, the Court will not grant Defendant's motion as presented. The Court urges the parties, including Probation, to come to an agreement on how best to address this issue. The Court will consider the issue further when a motion that accurately re?ects the position of all parties is ?led. The Court being fully advised in the premises, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Moti' 1s hereby 9 IED. DONE AND ORDERED at West Palm ac lorid a ,2007 bon?m M. MIDDLEBROOKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE cc: Attorneys of Record U. S. Probation Of?ce