Court filing
Motion — United States v. Shibley (Dkt. 199, W.D. Wash. No. 2:20-cr-00174)
Filed April 7, 2026 in Shibley; one of 140 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2026-04-07 |
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington · No. 2:20-cr-00174-JCC · Doc. 199 · 2026-04-07 · Docket on CourtListener
Full text
ORDER
CR20-0174-JCC
PAGE - 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
ERIC SHIBLEY,
Defendant.
CASE NO. CR20-0174-JCC
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant’s motion for early termination of
supervised release (Dkt. No. 196). Having considered the relevant record and briefing, the Court
DENIES the motion for the reasons explained herein.
Defendant was convicted of Wire Fraud (7 counts), Bank Fraud (3 counts), and Money
Laundering (5 counts). (Dkt. No. 128) The Court sentenced him to 48 months of imprisonment,
followed by three years of supervised release. (Dkt. No. 159.) Defendant began his term of
supervised release on May 29, 2024. (See Dkt. No. 189.) Counsel, on Defendant’s behalf, now
moves for early termination, citing his compliance with the terms of supervision, including the
satisfaction of his restitution obligation. (See Dkt. No. 196.)
The Court may terminate supervised release after one year of supervision “if it is satisfied
that such action is warranted by the conduct of the defendant released and the interest of justice.”
18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1). In deciding whether early termination is appropriate, the Court considers
Case 2:20-cr-00174-JCC Document 199 Filed 04/07/26 Page 1 of 2
ORDER
CR20-0174-JCC
PAGE - 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
several factors, including the nature and circumstances of the offense, the history and
characteristics of the defendant, the need to deter criminal conduct, the need to protect the public
from further crimes, and the need to avoid sentence disparity among similarly situated
defendants. 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) (citing to factors listed by 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)); United States v.
Emmett, 749 F.3d 817, 820 (9th Cir. 2014).
Here, the Court does not find early termination warranted. Given the seriousness of the
conduct underlying Defendant’s conviction and his conduct while on pretrial release, (see Dkt.
No. 29), the Court FINDS that 23 months of general compliance with the terms of supervision is
not sufficient to support termination. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1) (particularly the nature and
circumstances of the offense, and public safety factors).
Accordingly, Defendant’s motion for early termination of supervised release (Dkt. No.
196) is DENIED.
DATED this 7th day of April 2026.
A
John C. Coughenour
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 2:20-cr-00174-JCC Document 199 Filed 04/07/26 Page 2 of 2File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.wawd.290910.199.0.pdf
- Size
- 121,697 bytes
- SHA-256
- 2d94ac71d431f7a943f8f6799897a79c1447f441857f634e743de04cfed1b02c
- Original
- PACER (login required)