Order on Early Termination of Probation — USA v. Golden-Larimore et al (Dkt. 423)

Summary

An order of Chief Judge Brian C. Wimes of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, dated June 2, 2026, in United States v. Cameron P. Henderson, Case No. 4:23-CR-00098-BCW-4, denying the defendant's pro se motion for early termination of probation (Doc. #412). The order recounts that he was sentenced on June 27, 2024 to 3 years of probation on one count of Wire Fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343, expiring June 26, 2027, and summarizes his arguments about compliance and community work. It notes that Probation opposed the request, reporting false and fraudulent PPP loan applications that resulted in more than $220,000 in improperly issued funds and a remaining restitution balance of $10,349.72. Under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1) and § 3553, the Court finds more time is needed to monitor his finances.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI ,

WESTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, a)
V. Case No. 4:23-CR-00098-BCW-4
CAMERON P. HENDERSON,

Before the Court is Defendant’s pro se motion for early termination of probation. (Doc.
#412). The Court, being duly advised of the premises, denies said motion.

On June 27, 2024, Defendant was sentenced to a probation term of 3 years on one count of
Wire Fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. (Doc. #309). Defendant began his probation term on
June 27, 2024, and it is scheduled to expire on June 26, 2027. (Doc. #413).

On March 16, 2026, Defendant filed the instant motion for early termination of probation.
(Doc. #412). Defendant argues that early termination is warranted based on his compliance with
all probation requirements, his service as a referee and role model for young students, and his work
as a youth behavioral specialist, where he speaks to residents about discipline and remaining
drug-free. Defendant also notes that, despite his mental-health issues, he has continued to “face
the challenges with honesty and perseverance.” Id.

On March 27, 2026, the United States Probation Office (“Probation”) filed a memorandum
opposing Defendant’s request for early termination of probation. (Doc. #413). Probation reports
that Defendant engaged in a scheme to submit false and fraudulent Paycheck Protection Program
(“PPP”) loan applications, including false statements about his income and a business he did not

own, resulting in more than $220,000 in improperly issued funds. In light of these circumstances,
1

C ase cP89 42 Rh Hoos BOW Document 416 Filed 06/02/26 Page i of 2
and after considering the totality of the case, Probation does not support the Defendant’s request
for early termination. Probation further notes that continued supervision allows monitoring of
Defendant’s financial compliance, including his remaining restitution balance of $10,349.72, and
that although he has made progress in reintegration, he has already been afforded reduced-risk
supervision in recognition of his compliance.

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1), the Court may, after considering the factors set forth

in 18 U.S.C. § 3553, “terminate a term of supervised release and discharge the defendant released

at any time after the expiration of one year of supervised release, pursuant to the provisions of the
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure relating to the modification of probation, if the Court is
satisfied that such action is warranted by the conduct of the defendant released and the interest of
justice.”

Having reviewed the record, the Court finds early termination of probation is not warranted

at this time based on Defendant’s conduct and the factors articulated in 18 U.S.C. § 3553.
Specifically, the Court believes that additional time is necessary to monitor Defendant’s financial

status and to deter any future financial damage. Continued supervision will also support

Defendant’s rehabilitation by ensuring he receives ongoing assistance from Probation.
Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED Defendant’s pro se motion for early termination of probation (Doc. #412) is
DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 2, 2026 /s/ Brian C. Wimes
BRIAN C. WIMES, CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

Case 4:23-¢ -00098-BCW Document 416 Filed 06/02/26 Page 2of2
Case P53-E705608-BCW ~ Document 423. Filed 06/22/26 Page 2 of 2


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.mowd.169316.423.0.pdf

Size

98,385 bytes

SHA-256

15704db028cd694594c2c427d1c278af73dff27552a3545bd4b28d9df5c7c10e

Our copy

gov.uscourts.mowd.169316.423.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)