UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-4858
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)
Submitted: February 23, 2007 Decided: 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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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
monitoring. She was also ordered to pay approximately $23,800 in
restitution. 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. After giving this testimony, Bush invoked his
Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and refused
cross-examination. The district court determined that Reed
violated her probation, revoked her probation and sentenced her to
twenty-four months in prison.
The district court has broad discretion to revoke
probation if a condition of probation has been violated. United
States v. Cates, 402 F.2d 473, 474 (4th Cir. 1968). Moreover, the
district court need only be reasonably satisfied that the terms of
- 2 -
release were violated. Id. 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
Assistance Program. 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. See Mitchell v. United States, 526 U.S. 314,
322 (1999).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order
revoking Reed’s probation and imposing a twenty-four month
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.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -