Free Motion for Early Termination of Probation - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

ase 3:03-cr-00022-AVC Document 75 Filed 08/11/2008 Page1 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
UNITED STATES OF Al\/IERICA : CRIIVI. NO. 3:03-CR-22 (AVC)
V. :
FRANK S. Cl-IUANG : AUGUST 11, 2008
MOTION TO TERMINATE SUPERVISED RELEASE
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583 (e), Defendant Frank Chuang hereby moves this
Court to terminate the remaining year of his two year term of supervised release, such
action being warranted by the conduct of l\/lr. Chuang and is in the interest ofjustice.
On February 8, 2005, this Court sentenced l\/Ir. Chuang, upon a guilty plea to one
count of tax evasion, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7201, and a guilty plea to two counts of
making false claims, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 287 and 2, to thirty—three (33) morrths’
incarceration. In addition, this Court placed lVlr. Chuang on supervised release for a
term of two (2) years upon release from custody. As a special condition of supervised
release l\/lr. Chuang was ordered to participate in a program of mental health. This
Court also ordered l\/Ir. Chuang to make restitution in the amount of $4,210,450.55.
This Court may terminate a term of supervised release and discharge a
defendant "at any time after the expiration of one year of supervised release . . . if it is
satisfied that such action is warranted by the conduct ofthe defendant released and the
interest ofjustice." 18 U.S.C. § 3583 (e) (1). Early discharge is appropriate to "account
ORAL ARGUMENT IS NOT REQUESTED.
one stare street ~ Hmmm, comjtggf g?E>lgg?gt itllssbrlgtlgiqzkbiraibggt (860) 724-3921 ~ Juris N0. 27726

ase 3:03-cr-00022-AVC Document 75 Filed 08/11/2008 Page 2 of 4
for new or unforeseen circumstances" not contemplated at the initial imposition of
supervised release. See United States v. Lussier, 104 F.3d 32, 36 (2d Cir. 1997).
Changed circumstances that justify early termination include a defendant’s exceptionally
good behavior that makes the previously imposed term of supervised release "either too
harsh or inappropriately tailored to sen/e" general punishment goals. This
determination is within the discretion of the district court. ld.
l\/lr. Chuang’s two—year term of supervised release commenced on August 3,
2007. l\/lr. Chuang’s conduct has been exemplary during both the term of incarceration
and during the first year of supervised release. l\/lr. Chuang has fulfilled all the special
conditions of his supervised release, successfully completing the mental health program
at his own expense and making full restitution tothe government. l\/lr. Chuang has also
made additional restitution in a separate civil settlement with the government, for a total
payment of restitution of approximately $8,765,670.00. Even prior to sentencing, l\/lr.
Chuang exhibited model behavior during his trip to Taiwan to visit his parents in
December 2004 while on Pretrial Supervision. lVlr. Chuang continued his exemplary
behavior with another trip to Taiwan during October 2007, only three months into the
term of supervised release, to visit with family and celebrate his mother’s 90th birthday.
There is no longer any need to keep l\/lr. Chuang on supervised release. The
deterrent value of this case has been fully realized. l\/lr. Chuang accepted responsibility
for his crime, served a prison sentence, and completed more than a year towards his
term of supervised release. Prior to incarceration, lVlr. Chuang was a law—abiding
citizen, which was demonstrated at sentencing when lVlr. Chuang was found to have a
criminal history category of one. l\/lr. Chuang has made a successful transition back into
Rome Mce11tgm1,Ec. B Arrameys atLaw
one 3131333331 ·-· Hart.ford,C0nr1ecticut 06103-3101 G 13301 343-1000 » Fax 13301 724-3921 ¤ Juris N0. 27726

ase 3:03-cr-00022-AVC Document 75 Filed 08/11/2008 Page 3 of 4
society and has returned to his prior status of a law—abiding citizen. l\/Ir. Chuang’s
underlying offense was not a violent one, and he is not likely to commit this offense
again. There is no need for rehabilitative or corrective training given l\/lr. Chuang’s full
compliance with the terms and conditions of supervised release.
Additionally, the public interest is best served by terminating l\Ar. Chuang’s
supervised release because this will allow the Probation Office to invest its limited
resources in the most efficient manner, rather than on someone who has proven himself
to be beyond the need for supervision.
The undersigned has spoken to the U.S. Probation Officer, Xenia Gray, and she
is in agreement with the present motion, indicating that l\/lr. Chuang is a "perfect
candidate" for the termination of supervised release. The undersigned has also spoken
to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, who indicated their objection to the present motion and
intention to file an opposition.
For the foregoing reasons, this Court should terminate the remaining year of l\/lr.
Chuang’s supervised release.
DEFENDANT
FRANK S. CHUANG
By /s/
Austin J. l\/lcGuigan, Esq.
Federal Bar No. CT01004
Rome l\/lcGuigan, P.C.
One State Street
Hartford, CT 06103-3101
860-549-1000
860-724-3921 (fax)
l—lis Attorney
Rome McGurigan,§C. ¤ Attorneys at Law
One State Street ¤ Hartford, Connecticut 06103-3101 ¤ (860) 549-1000 ¤ Fax (860) 724-3921 ¤ Juris No. 27726

ase 3:03-cr-00022-AVC Document 75 Filed 08/11/2008 Page 4 of 4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that on the 11th day of August, 2008, a copy of the foregoing
was mailed, postage prepaid, via U.S. mail, to:
James A. Wade, Esq.
Robinson & Cole LLP
280 Trumbull Street
Hartford, CT 06103
William J. Nardini, Esq.
Assistant U.S. Attorney
157 Church Street, 23'd Floor
New Haven, CT 06510
Brian Topor
United State’s Probation Officer
U.S. Probation Office
450 Main Street
Hartford, CT 06103
/s/
Austin J. l\/IcGuigan
11797-1/FF7035
Rome McGuigcm,.#.C. ¤ Attorneys at Law
One State Street = Hartford, Connecticut 06103-3101 0 (860) 549-1000 ¤ Fax (860) 724-3921 ¤ Juris No. 27726