United States v. Marler

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. THOMAS E. MARLER, Defendant.

Court: United States District Court, District of Guam

Date published: Jun 7, 2022

Criminal 19-00031 (D. Guam Jun. 7, 2022)

Opinion

Criminal 19-00031

06-07-2022

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. THOMAS E. MARLER, Defendant.

The Honorable Alex R. Munson Designated Judge

ORDER

The Honorable Alex R. Munson Designated Judge

Before the court is Defendant Thomas E. Marler's Motion to Amend Terms of Supervised Release (“Motion”). Mot., ECF No. 257. For the foregoing reasons, the court DENIES the Motion.

A district court has broad discretion to modify conditions of supervised release. United States v. Bainbridge, 746 F.3d 943, 951 (9th Cir. 2014). Defendant requests that the court amend the terms of his supervised release to “match his pre-trial conditions.” Mot. at 1-2, ECF No. 257. Specifically, Defendant requests routine checkups with his long-term skin cancer physician in the Philippines, as well as monthly trips to continue his research concerning Guam's native tree species. Reply at 1, ECF No. 274. Defendant states that because the court granted a similar request in December 2019, the court should grant the instant request. Notice at 3, ECF No. 273.

The United States opposes the Motion, arguing that the terms of supervised release do not prohibit Defendant from traveling outside the district, including the Philippines. Opp'n. at 1-2, ECF No. 263. The court agrees.

Standard Condition No. 3 of Defendant's Terms of Supervision states that he “must not knowingly leave the federal judicial district where [he is] authorized to reside without first getting permission from the court or the probation officer.” Am. J. at 5, ECF No. 254. The court finds that the current terms of supervised release afford Defendant the relief he seeks, namely, the ability to travel to the Philippines. The purpose of supervised release is, axiomatically, to remain under supervision. Defendant has failed to sufficiently indicate why obtaining permission denies him the relief he seeks. Defendant is still able to travel to the Philippines, so long as he seeks and obtains permission from the court or the U.S. Probation Office.

Thus, Standard Condition No. 3 of Defendant's Terms of Supervision shall remain in place. Defendant's Motion to Amend the Terms of Supervised Release, ECF No. 257, is hereby DENIED.

SO ORDERED.