U.S. v. Douglas

In prosecution on charge of failure to register as sex offender, Dist. Ct. did not commit plain error by imposing 5-year term of supervised release that included requirements that defendant: (1) undergo sex offender assessment; (2) stay out of establishments that primarily sell alcohol; (3) avoid knowing association with felons; (4) allow probation officer to make home visits at any time; and (5) answer truthfully any question asked by probation officer. While defendant, who was 60 years old, had prior sex-related offense 15 years ago, Dist. Ct. could still impose such sex offender assessment given defendant’s past offense and given fact that he would obtain treatment only if warranted by assessment. Moreover, prohibition of patronizing establishments that primarily sell alcohol was appropriate given defendant’s history of alcohol abuse. Also, Dist. Ct. could require defendant to allow probation officer home visits at any time given defendant’s prior failure to comply with court-ordered supervision, and requirement that defendant refrain from knowing association with felons was not impermissibly vague. Additionally, requirement that defendant truthfully answer questions asked by probation officer did not implicate any 5^th Amendment concerns.