United States v. Kahn

District Court, District of Columbia·Decided November 22, 2022·No. Criminal No. 2008-0271·Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Case No. 08-cr-271-RCL-1 EDDIE RAY KAHN, Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Having served more than half of his 36-month term of supervised release, defendant Eddie Ray Kahn moves for early termination pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(l). Def.'s Mot., ECF No. 584. The government opposes Mr. Kahn's motion. See ECF No. 585. The U.S. Probation Office recommends that the Court grant Mr. Kahn's motion. ECF No. 589 at 2. Upon consideration of the submissions, the record herein, and the applicable law, the Court will GRANT Mr. Kahn's motion for early termination of supervised release.

I. BACKGROUND

Mr. Kahn founded and operated American Rights Litigators ("ARL"), a large-scale organization that sold tax defiance schemes to help thousands of individuals obstruct efforts by the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") to collect taxes for nearly a decade. See Presentence Investigation Report ("PSR"), ECF No. 357, at ,r,r 14-16. It did so through a variety of schemes, including by selling fictitious financial instruments to its customers and encouraging them to send those documents to the U.S. Department of the Treasury and to the IRS in purported payment of

their taxes. Id. ,r 23. The organization was registered in Florida, id. ,r 15, but Mr. Kahn promoted the scheme-and the organization's misrepresentations of federal law-throughout the country

via seminars, videotapes, phone calls, newsletters, and a book. Id. ,r 17.

In 2006, a jury in the Middle District of Florida convicted Mr. Kahn of conspiring to defraud the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, and making false or fraudulent claims to the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 287. See Jury Verdict, United States v. Snipes et al., No. 5:06-cr-022-2 (WTH) (PRL), ECF No. 418. He was sentenced to a total of 120 months' imprisonment, followed by 36 months of supervised release. See J., Snipes, ECF No. 459.

In 2010, a jury in this District convicted Mr. Kahn of conspiring to defraud the United States and commit mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 & 371 and mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 & 1341. Verdict Forms, ECF No. 328, at I. The Court sentenced Mr. Kahn to a total of240 months' imprisonment, followed by 36 months of supervised release. J., ECF No. 409. Mr. Kahn's conviction was affirmed on appeal. Mandate, ECF No. 484.

When Mr. Kahn had approximately 59 months remaining on his term of imprisonment, accounting for good behavior time, he filed an emergency motion for compassionate release. Emergency Mot., ECF No. 559. Based on his advanced age and serious medical conditions, he asked this Court to reduce his sentence to time served and allow him to "serve some or all of his supervised release term on home detention." Id. at 7. The government did not oppose Mr. Kahn serving the rest of the 59 months of his sentence on home detention. Gov't Resp., ECF No. 564. On December 22, 2020, this Court granted Mr. Kahn's motion in part, reducing his sentence to time served and converting his 36-month period of supervised release to home detention. 1 Mem. Order, ECF No. 566.

Mr. Kahn now argues for early termination of supervised release under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3583(e)(l). He argues that early termination of his home confinement is proper because he has

1 The Court's order also required that Mr. Kahn be subject to location-monitoring during the 36-month home confinement period. Id. Mr. Kahn later moved to modify his conditions of release remove this condition, which the government did not oppose. Unopposed Mot., ECF No. 580. This Court granted Mr. Kahn's request. Order, ECF No. 581.

complied with all of the conditions of his supervised release, he is of advanced age, and he has no history of violence. Def.'s Mot. at 4-5. Mr. Kahn further represents that, were this Court to terminate his supervised release, "he would not walk away unsupervised; he would continue to be supervised by the same U.S. Probation Office ... from his case in Florida. The only practical effect of terminating his supervision early in this District would be that he is no longer subject to home confinement." Id. at 6. He asks for the early termination of his supervised release so that he can travel and spend time with his family, including his wife, two children, and eight grandchildren. Id.

After receiving Mr. Kahn's motion, the Court ordered the U.S. Probation Office to provide a recommendation on the motion. See Minute Entry (Oct. 11, 2022). In its response, tlie Probation Office reported that Mr. Kahn currently maintains a stable residence with his wife in Colorado, has not engaged in any criminal conduct while under supervision, and has provided a DNA sample in accordance with his terms of supervised release. Id. Additionally, the Probation Office reports that Mr. Kahn has made "$5,589.44, in restitution payments with an outstanding balance of $19,410.56"2 and that "[t]here is no evidence to suggest he is not compliant with his financial disclosure." Probation Off. Petition at 2. The Probation Office'recommended that this Court grant Mr. Kahn's motion, concluding that, "[i]n [its] assessment, Mr. Kahn does not presently pose a specific risk to the community" and that the Probation Office "do[ es] not believe his removal from supervision will result in an increase[d] chance of a specific risk to the community." Id.

The government opposes Mr. Kahn's motion. The government agrees with Mr. Kahn that he has thus far complied with his terms of supervised release. Gov't Opp'n at 2. However, the government argues that the seriousness of Mr. Kahn's crime and statements attributed to Mr. Kahn

2 Though the Probation Office narrative uses the word "restitution," Mr. Kahn was sentenced to pay a fine, not restitution. See Probation Off. Petition at 1.

posted to a blog suggest that he still poses a danger to the community and thus weigh against an early termination of supervised release. Id. at 3---4.

II. LEGAL STANDARD

Motions for early termination of supervised release are governed by 18 U.S.C.

§ 3583(e)(l). That section allows courts to terminate a term of supervised release early when three conditions have been met and when certain factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) support the early termination. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(l). First, a defendant seeking early termination must have served at least one year of supervised release. Id. Second, the court must be satisfied that the early termination is "warranted by the conduct of the defendant." Id. Third, the court must find that the early termination is in "the interest of justice." Id. If these three requirements have been met, the court must consider whether an early termination is consistent with certain Section 3553(a) factors. Those factors are:

(a)(l) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant;

(2) the need for the sentence imposed -

(B) to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct;

(C) to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant;

(D) to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner;

(4) the kinds of sentence and the sentencing range established for (A) the applicable category of the offense committed by the applicable category of defendant as set forth in the [U.S. Sentencing Guidelines] ... in effect on the date the defendant is sentenced;

(5) any pertinent policy statement -

(A) issued by the Sentencing Commission pursuant to [28 U.S.C. § 994(a)(2)] subject to any amendments made to

such a policy statement by act of Congress (regardless of whether such amendments have yet to be incorporated by the Sentencing Commission into amendments issued under [28 U.S.C. § 994(p)]); and (B) that, except as provided in section 3742(g), is in effect on the date the defendant is sentenced;

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Kahn, (D.D.C. 2022).

United States v. Kahn (United States v. Kahn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Johnson
529 U.S. 53 (Supreme Court, 2000)
United States v. Darlene Mathis-Gardner
783 F.3d 1286 (D.C. Circuit, 2015)