Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Koller

United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin

July 18, 2016

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
JOSEPH ROGER KOLLER, Defendant.

          ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EARLY TERMINATION OF SUPERVISED RELEASE (DKT. NO. 106)

          HON. PAMELA PEPPER United States District Judge.

         On November 28, 1990, Judge Terence T. Evans sentenced the defendant to serve twenty-seven years in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons, followed by a term of five years of supervised release.

         On June 13, 2016, the defendant filed a motion asking the court to terminate that supervised release term two years short of its completion. Dkt. No. 106. The motion indicates, generally, that the defendant did well during his years in custody, and that since his release in July 2013, he has been going to church, spending time with his family, and trying to start a business. Id. at 2. He indicates that he no longer leads a criminal lifestyle, and has had no problems while on supervised release. He also argues that, at 69 years old, he suffers from a number of health problems which guarantee that he is "not going to be a threat to society." Id. at 2. The defendant states that the reason he wants to be terminated from supervised release early is that he wishes to vote in the upcoming November 2016 presidential election. Id. at 1-2.

         The government neither supports nor opposes the defendant's motion. Dkt. No. 109. The government points out, however, that the defendant's criminal history prior to his conviction in this case was a serious one, including a violent sexual assault while a member of the Outlaws motorcycle gang. Id. at 2. The government also points out that the defendant's letter does not provide any proof that he has "done anything extraordinary to warrant early termination." Id.

         The Seventh Circuit has held that it is within the district court's discretion as to whether to terminate a defendant's supervised release early. United States v. Lowe, 632 F.3d 996, 997-98 (7th Cir. 2011). See also United States v. Hook, 471 F.3d 766, 771 (7th Cir. 2006). Section 3583(e)(1) of Title 18 states that a district court may exercise that discretion "at any time after the expiration of one year of supervised release, . . . if it is satisfied that such action is warranted by the conduct of the defendant released and the interest of justice." The Seventh Circuit has advised that a district court should consider the factors 18 U.S.C. §3553(a) in deciding whether to exercise that discretion. Lowe, 632 F.3d at 998.

         Section 3553(a) lists the following factors:

(1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant;
(2) the need for the sentence imposed-
(A) to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense;
(B) to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct;
(C) to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and
(D) to provide the defendant with needed education or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner;
(3) the kinds of sentences available;
(4) the kinds of sentences and the sentencing range ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.