Order, Motion for Early Termination of Supervised Release (Denied) — United States v. Shibley (Document 199)

Summary

An order of Judge John C. Coughenour in United States v. Eric Shibley, No. CR20-0174-JCC, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, dated and filed April 7, 2026 as Document 199. It denies Shibley's motion for early termination of supervised release (Dkt. No. 196). The order recounts that he was convicted of seven counts of wire fraud, three of bank fraud and five of money laundering, sentenced to 48 months in prison and three years of supervised release, and began supervision on May 29, 2024. His counsel cited compliance and payment of restitution. Under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1), the court finds that, given the seriousness of the offense and his conduct on pretrial release, 23 months of general compliance does not support termination.

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

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 2

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.wawd.290910.199.0.pdf

Size

121,697 bytes

SHA-256

2d94ac71d431f7a943f8f6799897a79c1447f441857f634e743de04cfed1b02c

Our copy

gov.uscourts.wawd.290910.199.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)