From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Lai

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Oct 27, 2006
458 F. Supp. 2d 177 (S.D.N.Y. 2006)

Summary

denying early termination where petitioner wanted to return to family in Taiwan

Summary of this case from United States v. Bastien

Opinion

No. 99 Cr. 1272.

October 27, 2006.

Robert Russell Strang, U.S. Attorney's Office, SDNY, New York City, for Plaintiff.


DECISION AND ORDER


By letter dated October 10, 2006, defendant Peter Lai ("Lai") has applied to the Court, pursuant to Fed.R. Cr. P. 32.1(c), to terminate his three-year term of supervised release, which commenced upon Lai's release on December 28, 2004 from a 30-month sentence of incarceration for fraud in foreign currency trading. Thus, Lai has approximately 14 months remaining of supervised release on his sentence. As grounds for this request, Lai points to evidence he asserts demonstrates exceptionally good behavior or other circumstances warranting relief, including that he is now 70 years old and in failing health, and that he wishes to return to family in Taiwan. The Government has opposed Lai's request. Upon consideration of the application and the Government's response, the Court denies the application.

The Court is not persuaded that the circumstances Lai describes are sufficient to meet the standard articulated by the Second Circuit in United States v. Lussier to justify modification or termination of supervised release. See 104 F.3d 32, 35 (2d Cir. 1997) (noting that 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) (2) "requires the court to consider general punishment issues . . . when it decides to `modify, reduce, or enlarge' the term or conditions of supervised released.") Here, the Court considers that Lai was convicted of fraud involving 150 victims and a loss in excess of $2 million, of which, as the Government points out, Lai has paid only a nominal amount (approximately $10,330) in restitution.

Because the denial of this application does not unfavorably modify his existing terms of supervised release, Lai is not entitled to a hearing pursuant to Fed.R. Cr. P. 321(c).

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

United States v. Lai

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Oct 27, 2006
458 F. Supp. 2d 177 (S.D.N.Y. 2006)

denying early termination where petitioner wanted to return to family in Taiwan

Summary of this case from United States v. Bastien
Case details for

United States v. Lai

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. PETER T. LAI, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Oct 27, 2006

Citations

458 F. Supp. 2d 177 (S.D.N.Y. 2006)

Citing Cases

United States v. Stein

Continued supervision will help ensure that he continues to make restitution payments in a timely manner.…

United States v. Bendolph

Third, continuing supervision will ensure that Bendolph pays her remaining restitution. See 18 U.S.C. §…