USA v. Velazquez

1:21-cr-00107UtdFeb 3, 2026

Full text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOSEPH VELAZQUEZ,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
GRANTING IN PART MOTION TO
RELEASE DOCUMENTS
Case No. 1:21-cr-00107-JNP
District Judge Jill N. Parrish
Before the court is a petition to revoke Joseph Velazquez’s supervised release. His
probation officer alleges that he violated the conditions of his release by failing to submit to
numerous drug and alcohol tests, by testing positive for and admitting to using cocaine, by
tampering with a drug test, by committing the crime of possessing a dangerous weapon (brass
knuckles), and by interacting with a convicted felon without receiving prior permission. The court
set an evidentiary hearing for these allegations, and Velazquez’s probation officer is scheduled to
testify at the hearing. Velazquez moved for an order requiring the probation officer to disclose
notes that she compiled regarding her supervision of Velazquez prior to the evidentiary hearing.
ECF No. 85. The motion is GRANTED IN PART.
The Federal Rules of Evidence do not apply to supervised release revocation hearings. F ED.
R. EVID. 1101(d)(3). Additionally, because the revocation of supervised release is not part of a
criminal prosecution, individuals under supervision are not entitled to the same panoply of rights
available in a criminal proceeding. United States v. Williams, 106 F.4th 1040, 1045 (10th Cir.
2024). Instead, individuals facing revocation of supervised release must be afforded the “minimum
requirements of due process,” which generally includes “the right to confront and cross-examine
Case 1:21-cr-00107-JNP Document 102 Filed 02/03/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 1
of 3
2
adverse witnesses.” Id. (citation omitted). The due process requirements for supervised release
hearings are laid out in Rule 32.1(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Id. Under this
Rule, an individual on supervision is entitled to “an opportunity to appear, present evidence, and
question any adverse witness unless the court determines that the interest of justice does not require
the witness to appear,” as well as “an opportunity to make a statement and present any information
in mitigation.” F ED. R. CRIM. P. 32.1(b)(2)(C), (E).
Velazquez argues that because his probation officer will testify at his revocation hearing,
he should have an opportunity to review the officer’s supervision notes in order to have a full and
fair opportunity to cross-examine the officer during the hearing. The court agrees. The court has
confirmed that the probation officer reviewed her supervision notes in anticipation of testifying at
the hearing. Because the notes could be a basis for the probation officer’s testimony, the court finds
that disclosure of the notes is required for Velazquez to fairly exercise his due process right to
cross-examine witnesses against him.
The court, however, has reviewed the notes and has determined that one portion contains
confidential information regarding third parties and is not relevant to any of the allegations against
Velasquez. Therefore, the court will redact this portion of the notes before disclosing the document
to the parties. Cf. F ED. R. EVID. 612 (providing that if “justice requires,” a court may require a
party to disclose a writing that a witness has used to refresh his or her memory before testifying,
but if “the producing party claims that the writing includes unrelated matter, the court must
examine the writing in camera, delete any unrelated portion, and order that the rest be delivered to
the adverse party”).
Case 1:21-cr-00107-JNP Document 102 Filed 02/03/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 2
of 3
3
CONCLUSION
For the above-stated reasons, the court grants in part the motion to disclose the supervision
notes. Attached to this order is a redacted version of the notes filed under seal.
DATED February 3, 2026.
BY THE COURT
______________________________
Jill N. Parrish
United States District Court Judge
Case 1:21-cr-00107-JNP Document 102 Filed 02/03/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 3
of 3

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.