1

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

D-5 MATTHEW GOLDEN, 

 Defendant. 

 / 

Case No. 2:14-cr-20599-5 

HONORABLE STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S SECOND 

MOTION FOR EARLY TERMINATION OF SUPERVISED RELEASE [719]

Defendant Matthew Golden moved for early termination of supervised release. 

ECF 719. In 2017, the Court sentenced Mr. Golden to fifteen months' imprisonment 

followed by thirty-six months' supervised release for conspiracy to commit mail and 

wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349. ECF 513, PgID 2690–92. Mr. Golden 

previously moved for early termination of supervised release in November 2020. 

ECF 697. At the time of the first motion, Mr. Golden had served about twenty-two 

months of the thirty-six-month supervised release term. ECF 705, PgID 3918. The 

Court denied the motion in December 2020. ECF 705. The Court noted that Mr. 

Golden still owed more than $13 million in restitution and could travel out of state to 

visit relatives with permission of Mr. Golden's probation officer. Id. at 3919. After 

considering the information, the Court did "not believe that terminating Mr. Golden's 

term of supervised release after less than two years of supervision would adequately 

deter future criminal conduct." Id. But for the reasons below, the Court will grant the 

present motion. 

Case 2:14-cr-20599-SJM-RSW ECF No. 727, PageID.4134 Filed 09/28/21 Page 1 of 5
 2

The Court need not hold a hearing. See E.D. Mich. L.R. 7.1(h); E.D. Mich. L. 

Crim. R. 12.1(a). In fact, the Court considers Mr. Golden to have waived a hearing 

because he did not raise the need for one. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.1(c)(2)(A); see 

ECF 719. 

Under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1), the Court may "terminate a term of supervised 

release and discharge the defendant released 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." Mr. Golden has now 

served thirty-two months of the thirty-six-month supervised release term. See

ECF 719, PgID 4037. In the motion, Mr. Golden suggested the Court recently 

terminated supervised release for a similarly situated Co-Defendant who had only 

served half of a thirty-six-month supervised release term. Id. Mr. Golden also 

suggested that because Mr. Golden is similarly situated to the Co-Defendant, the 

Court should terminate supervised release here as well. Id.

The Co-Defendant's probation officer "recommended that the supervised 

releasee be discharged from supervision." ECF 719-3, PgID 4044. Here, Mr. Golden 

mentioned that "Government counsel indicated he would[] [not] oppose the motion if 

the Supervising Officer was in agreement with the relief sought." ECF 719, 

PgID 4038. But Mr. Golden's probation officer emailed the Court's chambers that the 

probation department did not recommend early termination of supervised release for 

Mr. Golden given the substantial balance of restitution still owed and because the 

supervised release term expires on January 10, 2022. The email noted that Mr. 

Case 2:14-cr-20599-SJM-RSW ECF No. 727, PageID.4135 Filed 09/28/21 Page 2 of 5
 3

Golden is low risk and only needs to submit an online report each month. When the 

Court's chambers asked the probation department whether there was any particular 

reason the department recommended early termination for the Co-Defendant but not 

Mr. Golden, the department responded, without further elaboration, that the decision 

was within the discretion of each probation officer. The Government ultimately 

opposed the motion for early termination, apparently because of the probation 

department's recommendation. See ECF 724. 

The Co-Defendant's early termination of supervised release does not 

necessitate that the Court also terminate Mr. Golden's supervised release. 

Section 3583(e)(1) states that courts ought to consider "the factors set forth in section 

3553(a)(1), (a)(2)(B), (a)(2)(C), (a)(2)(D), (a)(4), (a)(5), (a)(6), and (a)(7)" when deciding 

whether to modify or terminate supervised release. Section 3553(a)(6) states that 

courts should consider "the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among 

defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct." 

Section 3553(a)(6) is, however, "not concerned with disparities between one 

individual's sentence and another individual's sentence, despite the fact that the two 

are co-defendants." United States v. Simmons, 501 F.3d 620, 623 (6th Cir. 2007) 

(citations omitted). Instead, "[s]ubsection 3553(a)(6) is concerned with national 

disparities among the many defendants with similar criminal backgrounds convicted 

of similar criminal conduct." Id. (citations omitted). As a result, the fact that the 

Court granted the Co-Defendant early termination of supervised release does not 

Case 2:14-cr-20599-SJM-RSW ECF No. 727, PageID.4136 Filed 09/28/21 Page 3 of 5
 4

necessitate that the Court also grant Mr. Golden early termination of supervised 

release. 

Still, the Court will grant the motion for early termination of supervised 

release. The discrepancy created by granting early termination for the Co-Defendant 

but not for Mr. Golden may be perceived as arbitrary. Given that there is no 

identified, specific difference between the cases of Mr. Golden and the Co-Defendant 

that led to the disparate recommendations, the probation department's inconsistent 

consideration of § 3583(e)(1) and the applicable § 3553(a) factors appears arguably 

unjust. Thus, under § 3583(e)(1), "the interest of justice" favors early termination in 

Mr. Golden's case as well. 

Moreover, after applying § 3583(e)(1) and the applicable § 3553(a) factors to 

Mr. Golden's case, early termination is warranted. Section 3583(e)(1) requires courts 

to consider the conduct of defendants in deciding whether to grant a motion for early 

termination. Sections 3553(a)(1) and (2)(C) have courts consider the defendant's 

characteristics and whether punishment protects the public from future criminal 

activity by the defendant. As discussed, under Section 3583(e)(1) courts should 

consider the factors when ruling on an early termination motion. Here, all three 

provisions favor granting the motion for early termination of supervised release. Mr. 

Golden has found gainful employment, adjusted to his new life, and abided by the 

laws since his release. ECF 719, PgID 4040. In addition, Mr. Golden's record remains 

unblemished since sentencing, id., and the probation department's recent email to 

the Court's chambers acknowledged that Mr. Golden is "low risk." Mr. Golden has 

Case 2:14-cr-20599-SJM-RSW ECF No. 727, PageID.4137 Filed 09/28/21 Page 4 of 5
 5

therefore undergone significant rehabilitation and is no longer a danger to the 

community. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553(a)(2), 3583(e)(1). 

The Court acknowledges that Section 3553(a)(7) has courts consider whether 

defendants need to provide restitution to victims for a criminal offense and that the 

factor is one that courts should consider when deciding an early termination of 

supervised release motion. § 3583(e)(1). But Mr. Golden will still need to pay 

restitution even after supervised release is terminated, and the other § 3553(a) 

factors outweigh the restitution factor in the present case despite the remaining 

restitution balance. The Court will therefore grant the motion for early termination 

of supervised release. 

WHEREFORE, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's motion for early 

termination of supervised release [719] is GRANTED. 

 SO ORDERED. 

 

 s/ Stephen J. Murphy, III 

 STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III 

 United States District Judge 

Dated: September 28, 2021 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties 

and/or counsel of record on September 28, 2021, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. 

 s/ David P. Parker 

 Case Manager 

Case 2:14-cr-20599-SJM-RSW ECF No. 727, PageID.4138 Filed 09/28/21 Page 5 of 5