U.S. v. CAVENDER, 3:14-00056. (2014)
Court: District Court, M.D. Tennessee
Number: infdco20141027a26
Visitors: 3
Filed: Oct. 23, 2014
Latest Update: Oct. 23, 2014
Summary: ORDER ALETA A. TRAUGER, District Judge. The defendant has filed a well-supported Motion For Early Termination of Supervised Release (Docket No. 7) after one year of a 5-year supervised release term. Upon the filing of a Response in opposition by the local United States Attorney's Office (Docket No. 9), the court ordered that the supervising probation officer provide a report to the court and that the opinion of the prosecuting attorney in Arizona be filed with the court. (Docket No. 10) The A
Summary: ORDER ALETA A. TRAUGER, District Judge. The defendant has filed a well-supported Motion For Early Termination of Supervised Release (Docket No. 7) after one year of a 5-year supervised release term. Upon the filing of a Response in opposition by the local United States Attorney's Office (Docket No. 9), the court ordered that the supervising probation officer provide a report to the court and that the opinion of the prosecuting attorney in Arizona be filed with the court. (Docket No. 10) The Ar..
More
ORDER
ALETA A. TRAUGER, District Judge.
The defendant has filed a well-supported Motion For Early Termination of Supervised Release (Docket No. 7) after one year of a 5-year supervised release term. Upon the filing of a Response in opposition by the local United States Attorney's Office (Docket No. 9), the court ordered that the supervising probation officer provide a report to the court and that the opinion of the prosecuting attorney in Arizona be filed with the court. (Docket No. 10) The Arizona prosecuting attorney opposes early termination of supervised release at this time (Docket No. 11), and the supervising probation officer in this district likewise opposes early termination at this point, in a Memorandum that is being filed as an attachment to this Order.
Taking all matters into account, the request to terminate supervised release this early is premature and is therefore DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to renewing it at a later point in time.
It is so ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
