ORDER

ELIZABETH A. KOVACHEVICH, District Judge.

This cause is before the Court on:

Defendant David Ziegel moves for early termination of probation, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim P. 32.1 and 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3564(c).

Defendant David Ziegel was sentenced on January 31, 2014 to one year and one day of incarceration, followed by three years of supervised release. The Court granted the Government's Motion to Recognize Defendant's Substantial Assistance. (Dkt. 557, 558, 561). Defendant Ziegel's assistance continued after Defendant was sentenced. (Dkt. 612). At the hearing on Defendant Ziegel's violation of conditions of release, (Dkts. 636, 645, 647), the Court vacated the previous sentence, and imposed a sentence of three years of probation, with the requirement that Defendant Ziegel complete a 90-day residential program at Phoenix House. Defendant Ziegel successfully completed the 90-day residential program. (Dkt. 679). After a status conference, an Amended Judgment and Commitment Order was entered on March 27, 2015 to include the special condition of a substance abuse program.

In his Motion for Early Termination, Defendant Ziegel states he is currently enrolled in and continues to participate in the Pathfinders treatment program. Probation has supervised Defendant Ziegel for fifteen months and three weeks. Probation has indicated that Defendant Ziegel is classified as a low/moderate risk level, and is eligible for early termination.

The Government and the U.S. Probation Office do not object to the Motion for Early Termination of probation.

After an analysis of the factors considered in 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3553(a), the Court may terminate probation at any time after one year of supervised release, when the Court is satisfied that termination is warranted by the defendant's conduct and is in the interest of justice, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3564(c).

The § 3553(a) factors that the Court must consider are: (1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant; (2) the need for the sentence imposed to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct; (3) the need for the sentence imposed to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; (4) the need for the sentence imposed to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner; (5) the kinds of sentence and sentencing range established for the applicable category of offense committed, as set forth in the Sentencing Guidelines; (6) pertinent policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission; (7) the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct; and (8) the need to provide restitution to any victims of the offense. 18 U.S.C. §§ 3583(e), 3553(a)(1), (a)(2)(B)-(D), (a)(4)-(7). However, "the nature and circumstances of the offense, deterrence, public protection, correctional treatment, the guideline range established for the offense, pertinent government policies, uniformity of sentences among defendant committing the same types of crimes are all also considerations related to supervised release." U.S. v. Reaaan, 162 Fed. Appx. 912, 914 (11th Cir. 2006). The same factors that apply to consideration of termination of supervised release apply to consideration of early termination of probation. See United States v. Basel, 2011 U.S Dist. LEXIS 67827 (E.D. LA June 24, 2011).

After consideration of the relevant Sec. 3553(a) factors, and in light of the absence of objection by the Government and the U.S. Probation Office, the Court is satisfied that early termination of probation is warranted by Defendant's conduct and is in the interest of justice. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the Motion for Early Termination of Probation (Dkt. 727) is granted.

DONE and ORDERED.