USA v. Breithaupt et al

PROB 12CReport Date: May 6, 2025
(6/16)
United States District Court
for the
Eastern District of Washington
Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender Under Supervision
Name of Offender: Mark A. PrestonCase Number: 0980 2:22CR00133-TOR-16
Address of Offender: Spokane, Washington 99202
Name of Sentencing Judicial Officer: The Honorable Thomas O. Rice, U.S. District Judge
Date of Ori
ginal Sentence: January 25, 2024
Original Offense: Unlawful Access to Stored Communications, 18 U.S.C. § 2701(a)(1), (b)(2)(A)
Original Sentence:
Revocation Sentence:
(May 1, 2024)
Probation - 36 Months
Prison - 8 Months;
TSR - 12 Months
Type of Supervision: Supervised Release
Asst. U.S. Attorney:Earl Allan HicksDate Supervision Commenced: September 6, 2024
Defense Attorney:Ryan Mark FarrellDate Supervision Expires: September 5, 2025
PETITIONING THE COURT
To issue a WARRANT and to incorporate the violation(s) contained in this petition in future proceedings with the
violation(s) previously reported to the Court on 04/09/2025.
On September 10, 2024, Mr. Mark Preston signed his conditions relative to case number 2:22CR00133-TOR-16,
indicating that he understood all conditions as ordered by the Court.
The probation officer believes that the offender has violated the following condition(s) of supervision:
Violation Number
2
Nature of Noncompliance
Mandatory Condition #3: You must refrain from any unlawful use of a controlled
substance. You must submit to one drug test within 15 days of release from imprisonment
and at least two periodic drug tests thereafter, as determined by the court.
Supporting Evidence: Mr. Preston is alleged to have violated mandatory condition number
3 by ingesting marijuana, previously occurring on or about May 5, 2025, based on both
urinalysis testing and the subject’s admission of such use.
Specifically, on May 5, 2025, Mr. Preston reported to the U.S. Probation Office in Spokane
as directed, albeit approximately 20 minutes late. Mr. Preston indicated current sobriety and
was directed to submit to urinalysis testing. Mr. Preston then required more than 2 hours to
submit a urinalysis sample that still proved insufficient in volume for laboratory testing. Mr.
Preston was provided several opportunities to admit to recent drug use during the prolonged
testing process, which Mr. Preston continued to deny.
FILED IN THE
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
SEAN F. M
CAVOY, CLERK
May08,2025
Case 2:22-cr-00133-ACE ECF No. 1427 filed 05/08/25 PageID.<pageID>
Page 1 of 3

Prob12C
Re: Preston, Mark A.
May 6, 2025
Page 2
Following the undersigned officer beginning to review the immediate results of the test, Mr.
Preston stated, “it’s positive for marijuana, isn’t it?” Mr. Preston was asked why he would
make the statement, and he indicated that he was worried he would be arrested, so he
smoked marijuana prior to reporting to the U.S. Probation Office. The sample proved
presumptive positive for marijuana, and Mr. Preston did sign a drug use admission form
serving to document the verbal admission.
3
Standard Condition #13: You must follow the instructions of the probation officer related
to the conditions of supervision.
Supporting Evidence: Mr. Preston is alleged to have violated standard condition number
13 by failing to report to the U.S. Probation Office on May 2, 2025, as directed by a U.S.
probation officer.
Specifically, on May 1, 2025, the U.S. Probation Office received collateral information from
a concerned community member that Mr. Preston was observed in the community and
appeared to be under the influence of illicit substances. In response to the information, Mr.
Preston was contacted telephonically on the day in question by a U.S. probation officer and
was advised he needed to report for random urinalysis testing. Mr. Preston indicated he
could not make it on the day in question due to employment, but indicated he would be able
to report the following day, May 2, 2025, around 12 p.m.
On May 2, 2025, at 12:30 p.m., a U.S. probation officer verified that Mr. Preston had not
reported to the U.S. Probation Office as directed, and he had not signed into the office’s
sign-in sheet located in the U.S. Probation Office lobby. At approximately 2:30 p.m., a U.S.
probation officer attempted to contact Mr. Preston telephonically; however, his phone rang
through to voice mail after which an automated message was received indicating the
subject’s voice mailbox was full and could not accept new messages.
On May 5, 2025, the undersigned officer left a voice mail for and sent a text message to Mr.
Preston directing him to report to the U.S. Probation Office on the day in question prior to
2 p.m. The undersigned officer received a call from Mr. Preston approximately 10 minutes
later, advising that he had observed a missed call from the undersigned officer. When
confronted as to his failure to report as directed the week prior, Mr. Preston initially denied
having spoken to a U.S. probation officer the week prior, after he reported previously on
April 30, 2025, for his initial appearance in Spokane as required. Despite continued
discussion on the topic Mr. Preston continued to indicate that he was unsure as to what this
officer was “referring to.” The undersigned officer then provided specific times of calls, as
well as specific dialogue that was exchanged between the parties during the call, after which
Mr. Preston finally indicated that he in fact remembered the conversation in question. Mr.
Preston was directed to report to the U.S. Probation Office prior to 2 p.m.
On May 5, 2025, at approximately 2:20 p.m., Mr. Preston reported to the U.S. Probation
Office as directed, and then required over 2 hours to submit to urinalysis testing. The sample
ultimately provided by Mr. Preston was insufficient in volume for laboratory testing and
reflected presumptive positive for marijuana. Mr. Preston admitted that he had failed to
report to the U.S. Probation Office the week prior due to his becoming “distracted” at his
place of employment. Mr. Preston indicated he did try to report later in the day, but was not
able to make it prior to the office closing. Mr. Preston denied he attempted to contact anyone
after realizing that he had missed the agreed upon report time.
Case 2:22-cr-00133-ACE ECF No. 1427 filed 05/08/25 PageID.<pageID>
Page 2 of 3

Case 2:22-cr-00133-ACE ECF No. 1427 filed 05/08/25 PageID.<pageID>
Page 3 of 3