govinfo:USCOURTS-insd-3_07-cr-00039-6

1 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 
EV ANSVILLE DIVISION 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )  
 )  
Plaintiff, )  
 )  
v. ) No. 3:07-c r-00039-RLY-CSW 
 )  
BRADLEY E. MCCOLLOM, ) -01 
 )  
Defendant. )  
 
ORDER AFFIRMING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND 
RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR STAY 
PENDING APPEAL 
 
 On May 13, 2008, Defendant Bradley E.  McCollom was sentenced to three counts 
of distribution, receipt, and possession of sexually explicit material involving minors in 
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252.  He was sentenced on June 30, 2008, to 120 months of 
imprisonment in the United States Bureau of Prisons followed by a lifetime of supervised 
release.  (Dkt. 21).   
Since his release from imprisonment, Defendant has violated his terms of 
supervised release three separate times.  Each violation caused a new judgment of 
conviction to be issued, setting forth a new set of supervised release conditions.  (Dkts. 
49, 90 & 114).  Relevant here are the conditions ordered on August 16, 2024.  (Dkt. 114).   
 On March 5, 2025, and Augu st 12, 2025, Defendant filed pro se petitions to 
modify the conditions of his supervised release.  (Dkts. 116, 118).  The court appointed 
Defendant CJA counsel, who filed a Motion to Correct and/or Modify the Terms of 
Supervised Release ("Amended Motion to Modify") on Defendant's behalf.  (Dkt. 123).  
Case 3:07-cr-00039-RLY-CSW     Document 151     Filed 04/22/26     Page 1 of 4 PageID #:
<pageID>
2 
 
In his Amended Motion to Modify, Defendant requested the following modifications of 
his Conditions of Supervision: (1) to allow contact with his alleged wife, Kimberly 
Tempel/Kimberly McCollom1 ("Kimberly"); (2) to remove the condition of substance 
abuse testing in Paragraph 15; (3) to possibly remove the condition of periodic polygraph 
testing in Paragraph 16; (4) clarification of the prohibition regarding contact with minors 
in Paragraph 17; and (5) clarification of Paragraph 19 regarding places he can and cannot 
enter where minors may be present.  (Dkt. 123 at 4; Dkt. 114 at ECF p. 4). 
On December 16, 2025, the court held an evidentiary hearing pursuant to Federal 
Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1(c), where Probation Officer Andrea Rushing and 
Kimberly offered witness testimony and exhibits were introduced.  (Dkt. 126-1).    
On February 23, 2026, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation 
("R&R") recommending that Defendant's Amended Motion to Modify be GRANTED IN 
PART and DENIED IN PART (Dkt. 140).  The Magistrate Judge recommended that the 
Amended Motion to Modify be GRANTED (1) to remove the condition regarding 
substance abuse testing in Paragraph 15, and (2) to clarify the places Defendant can and 
cannot enter in Paragraph 19 by AMENDING the paragraph to read: 
You shall not enter or remain at a place for the primary purpose of observing 
or contacting children under the age of 18. You may go to a retail store or 
complex for legitimate shopping purposes. You may go to a Christmas light 
display or an ornament shop. You may not be in a store that is designed for 
children less than eighteen (18) years old, for example toy stores or children's 
clothing stores. 
 
 
1 Defendant and Kimberly claim to be lawfully married, although there is evidence which 
strongly suggests Defendant is Kimberly's biological father.  (See, e.g., Dkt. 140 at 5–7). 
Case 3:07-cr-00039-RLY-CSW     Document 151     Filed 04/22/26     Page 2 of 4 PageID #:
<pageID>
3 
 
(Dkt. 140 at 8, 18; Dkt. 126 at 2).  The Magistrate Judge also recommended that the 
Amended Motion to Modify be DENIED (1) to the extent Defendant seeks permission to 
contact Kimberly; (2) to the extent Defendant seeks to modify the condition regarding 
periodic polygraph testing in Paragraph 16; and (3) to the extent Defendant seeks to 
modify the conditions regarding contact with minors in Paragraph 17.  (Dkt. 140 at 17–
18).  And the Magistrate Judge recommended that the court DENY AS MOOT 
Defendant's pro se Motion to Correct Terms of Supervised Release (Dkt. 116)  and 
Defendant's Pro Se Motion to Modify Conditions of Supervised Release (Dkt. 118).  
Lastly, she recommended that the court ENTER amended Conditions of Supervised 
Release in accordance with those recommendations.  (Dkt. 140 at 18). 
 On March 2, 2026, Defendant filed a Motion for Leave to File Pro Se Objections.  
(Dkts. 141).  Three days later, Defendant's counsel timely filed an Objection to the 
Magistrate Judge's R&R.  (Dkts. 143).  Defendant's Objection (filed by his counsel) 
primarily concerns the Magistrate Judge's assessment of the evidence regarding his 
relationship with Kimberly and the Magistrate Judge's finding that Kimberly's failure to 
appear for a court-ordered paternity test compromised her credibility.  The Government 
filed a response urging the court to affirm the R&R. 
 The court, having considered the relevant  memorandums of law, the R&R, and the 
applicable law, OVERRULES Defendant's Objection (Dkt. 143) and AFFIRMS the 
R&R (Dkt. 140).  Accordingly, Defendant's pro se Motion to Correct Terms of 
Supervised Release (Dkt. 116) is DENIED AS MOOT, Defendant's Pro Se Motion to 
Modify Conditions of Supervised Release (Dkt. 118) is DENIED AS MOOT, and 
Case 3:07-cr-00039-RLY-CSW     Document 151     Filed 04/22/26     Page 3 of 4 PageID #:
<pageID>
4 
 
Defendant's (Amended) Motion to Correct and/or Modify the Terms of Supervised 
Release (Dkt. 123) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART consistent with the 
R&R.  The court SHALL ENTER amended Conditions of Supervised Release in 
accordance with this Order.  Lastly, Defendant's Motion for Leave to File Pro Se 
Objections (Dkt. 141) is STRICKEN.  United States v. Rollins, 309 F. App'x 37, 38 (7th 
Cir. 2009) ("[Defendant] has no right to file a pro se brief or motion in any court while 
counsel represents him."); United States v. Gwiazdzinski, 141 F.3d 784, 787 (7th Cir. 
1998) (striking pro se brief where party was represented by counsel). 
 
IT IS SO ORDERED this 22nd day of April 2026.    
 
s/rly 
 
 
Distributed Electronically to Registered Counsel of Record. 
Case 3:07-cr-00039-RLY-CSW     Document 151     Filed 04/22/26     Page 4 of 4 PageID #:
<pageID>

Passage view · GavelSight