Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Johnson v. United States

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Northern Division

June 6, 2019

MICHAEL PAUL JOHNSON, Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

          ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER'S MOTION TO TERMINATE SUPERVISED RELEASE

          THOMAS L. LUDINGTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         On December 3, 2008, judgment was entered in the United States District Court of the Southern District of Iowa against Michael Paul Johnson for one count of Receipt of Visual Depictions of Minors Engaging in Sexually Explicit Conduct. Judgment, ECF No. 1-1. On July 25, 2017, the Court received a request for transfer of jurisdiction from the Southern District of Iowa to this Court. ECF No. 2. On July 28, 2014, the Court accepted transfer of jurisdiction. Id.

         I.

         On January 23, 2004, a federal search warrant was executed for Johnson's residence. Federal Bureau of Investigations agents searched Johnson's computer and discovered that it had the file-sharing program “Limewire” installed. There were 311 sessions logged on the program with more than 600 images. In addition to child pornography, “some of the images involved sadistic of [sic] masochistic conduct or other depictions of violence.” Presentence Investigation Report.

         On May 8, 2007, a grand jury charged Johnson with one count of Distribution of Visual Depictions of Minors Engaging in Sexually Explicit Conduct, one count of Receipt of Visual Depictions of Minors Engaging in Sexually Explicit Conduct, and one count of Possession of Visual Depictions of Minors Engaging in Sexually Explicit Conduct. ECF No. 1-2. Plaintiff pled guilty to Receipt of Visual Depictions of Minors Engaging in Sexually Explicit Conduct and the remaining two charges were dismissed. ECF No. 1-1.

         On December 3, 2008, Johnson was sentenced to 84 months incarceration and 10 years supervised release. Id. He began his supervised release on October 30, 2013. The terms of Johnson's supervised release included consenting to periodic unannounced examinations of his computer by the U.S. Probation Office, a prohibition on owning a camera, maintaining a log of all websites he visited, a prohibition on using a computer with an internal, external or wireless modem unless authorized for employment, a prohibition on viewing pornography, participation in a mental health treatment program and a sex offender treatment program, and a prohibition on unsupervised contact with children. Id. On September 3, 2014, Johnson's terms of supervised release were modified to permit him unsupervised contact with his son. ECF No. 3.

         II.

         Johnson has now filed a motion for early termination of his supervised release. ECF No. 4.

         A court may terminate a term of supervised release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3583(e) which provides:

(e) Modification of conditions or revocation.--The court may, after considering 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)--
(1) 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 it is satisfied that such action is warranted by the conduct of the defendant released and the interest of justice; 1

8 U.S.C. §3583(e). The factors to be considered include “the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant” and “the need for the sentence imposed…to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct[, ] to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant[, ] and to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner.” 18 U.S.C. (a)(1), (a)(2)(B)-(D).

         III.

         Johnson contends that his term of supervised release should be terminated because he no longer requires supervision. He explains that he has integrated into his community and is currently employed by Dow/DuPont as a Chemical Process Operator. He has completed his sex offender treatment program and has never violated his supervision. He lives with his wife and son. He purchased and moved into the house next to his own and had his parents move into his ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.