United States District Court, D. Idaho
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER
Lynn Winmill U.S. District Court Judge
the Court is Defendant Tyrone D. Chacone's Motion for
Early Termination of Supervised Release (Dkt. 310) as well as
his unopposed Motion for Reappointment of Counsel (Dkt. 309).
For the reasons explained below, the Court will grant both
November 2005, Mr. Chacon pleaded guilty to distribution of
methamphetamine. He was sentenced to 262 months'
imprisonment, although his sentence was twice reduced. In
September 2010, the Court reduced his sentence to 180 months,
based on a settlement agreement between the parties.
See Dkt. 293. Under the terms of the settlement, Mr.
Chacon agreed not to litigate an
ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim if the government
agreed to a reduced sentence of 180 months. In September
2015, Chacon's sentence was again reduced, this time to
144 months, based on an amendment to the sentencing
guidelines. See Dkt. 302.
Chacon began serving his five-year term of supervision in May
2016. If he stays on track, he will be finished in May 2021.
He asks to be released now, roughly two years early. The
United States Attorney's Office opposes the motion. The
United States Probation Office is remaining neutral.
18 U.S.C. § 3583(e), district courts have discretion to
grant early termination of supervised release so long as the
defendant has served at least one year on supervision and the
court is satisfied that early release is “warranted by
the conduct of the defendant released and the interest of
justice.” In exercising its discretion, the court must
consider certain statutory factors enumerated in 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a), such as nature and circumstances of the
underlying offense, the defendant's history and
characteristics; deterrence; public safety; rehabilitation;
proportionality; and consistency. See id (citing
§ 3553(a)(1); (a)(2)(B)-(D); (a)(4)-(7)).
first to the defendant's conduct, this Court is not moved
by perfect compliance with the terms of supervision. That is
what is expected of any defendant. As one court put it,
“[m]odel prison conduct and full compliance with the
terms of supervised release is what is expected of a person
under the magnifying glass of supervised release and does not
warrant early termination.” United States v.
McKay, 352 F.Supp.2d 359, 361 (S.D.N.Y. 1998).
Defendants seeking an early release must instead show
something more - something unusual or extraordinary.
Accord United States v. Etheridge, 999 F.Supp.2d
192, 195 (D.D.C. 2013).
Chacon has done that. As outlined more fully in his moving
papers, Mr. Chacon's progress goes far beyond perfect
compliance with the terms of supervision. After having taken
full advantage of educational and vocational opportunities in
prison, Mr. Chacon continued his upward trajectory after
release. He almost immediately reopened his tattoo shop,
which is reportedly successful. He is an important part of
his family and extended family. And he has demonstrated a
commitment to giving back to his community by donating time
and money to various local charitable organizations.
Mr. Chacon's post-release activities and successes have
been extraordinary and convince this Court that early
termination is “warranted by the conduct of the
defendant.” 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1)(A).
The Interests of Justice; The Relevant § 3553(a)
Court also finds that early termination is in “in the
interest of justice.” Id. In making this
determination, the Court has considered each of the relevant
§ 3553(a) factors. The Court will not explicitly discuss
each factor here, thought it will note that several weigh in
favor of early termination. Among other things: Mr. Chacon is
no longer a threat to the public. § 3553(a)(2)(C). The
Court does not believe he would benefit from further
correctional treatment or vocational training, and it does