Opinion
Case No. 3:08 CR 162
12-17-2014
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. KENDRA SASSER Defendant
ENTRY AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S SECOND MOTION FOR EARLY TERMINATION OF SUPERVISED RELEASE [DOC. #35]
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant's Second Motion for Early Termination of Supervised Release [Doc. #35]. The Government filed a response to said Motion on December 9, 2014 [Doc. #36].
Said Motion accurately indicates that Defendant has been compliant and has satisfied all of her obligations on supervised release over the last three years and two months.
The Motion further reflects that Probation has no objections to said termination and refers the Court to its previous First Motion for Early Termination [Doc. #29].
At that time, the Court recognized, as it does now, the Defendant's compliance and successful completion of her obligation. However, the Court also found that her compliance alone did not rise to the extraordinary conduct or behavior, justifying an early termination. Defendant's present motion again argues compliance and incorporates her previous motion.
As the Court has previously stated in its Entry and Order [Doc. #34] denying the first motion, there has been no argument or showing as to why Defendant's compliance equates to extraordinary conduct and therefore Defendant's Second Motion [Doc. #35] is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/_________
JUDGE THOMAS M. ROSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT