Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO.: 5:99cr3-SPM

RUBY ARLENE HERNANDEZ

(formerly RUBY ARLENE JOHNSON)

______________________________/

O R D E R

This cause is before the court upon the Defendant’s Motion for Early Termination

of Supervised Release. (Doc. 125). 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3583(e)(1) and after considering the factors set forth in

§3553(a), a Court may terminate a term of supervised release in which the defendant has 1

already served at least one year of supervised release. United States v. Perry, 397

Fed.Appx. 521, 522 (11th Cir. 2010). Early termination is granted only “if [the Court] is

satisfied that such action is warranted by the conduct of the defendant released and the

interest of justice.” 18 U.S.C. §3583.

Further, supervised release was designed to “ease the defendant’s transition into

the community.” United States v. Pugh, 515 F.3d 1179, 1199 (11th Cir.2008). That is, to

“improve the odds of a successful transition from the prison to liberty.” Johnson v. United

States, 529 U.S. 694, 708-09 (2000). The goal is, in part, to facilitate training and

rehabilitation, including restitution. Id. at 709.

Specifically, the statute requires the court to examine 18 U.S.C. §§3553(a)(1), (a)(2)(B)-(D), and

1

(a)(4)-(7) before terminating supervised release. 18 U.S.C. §3583(e)(1). 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.

Reagan, 162 Fed.Appx. 912, 914 (11th Cir. 2006).
Page 2 of 2

If the court needs to modify the supervised release then in general a hearing is

required. Fed.R.Crim.P. 32.1(c)(1). However, if the relief sought is favorable to the

person, does not extend the term of supervised release, and the attorney for the

Government has received notice of the relief sought and has not objected despite

reasonable time to do so, then a hearing is not necessary. Fed.R.Crim.P. 32.1(c)(2).

In this case, the Defendant has served over five years of her ten year term of

supervised release. The Defendant has paid her $100 assessment and $1000 fine. The

Defendant has maintained employment. The Defendant has also become involved in

community projects focusing on finding viable ways to prevent recidivism. In fact, the

Defendant hopes to teach life classes to prisoners one day. Additionally, the Defendant

has distanced herself from her co-defendant and now ex-husband. The Government has

been given ample time to oppose the motion but has chosen not to do so. The probation

officer for the Defendant has noted that the Defendant has complied with her supervised

release conditions.

Accordingly, having considered all of the factors in 18 United States Code Section

3553(a) and the facts as presented, the court is satisfied that early termination is

“warranted by the conduct of the defendant and in the interest of justice.” 18 U.S.C.

§3564(c). It is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the motion for early termination

of supervised release (doc. 125) is GRANTED and Defendant’s supervised release is

hereby terminated.

SO ORDERED this 7th day of January, 2013. 

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE