USA v. Ramirez-Martinez

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v. 	2:23-cr-1578-JMC
LAURA RAMIREZ-MARTINEZ,
Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S UNOPPOSED
MOTION FOR EARLY TERMINATION OF SUPERVISED RELEASE
On August 28, 2026, Defendant Laura Ramirez-Martinez filed a motion for early
termination of supervised release in the above-styled criminal action (Doc. No. 68). 	The Court
sentenced Defendant to three years of supervised release. Defendant’s term of supervised release
is set to expire in March 2027. The government and Defendant’s probation officer do not oppose
the motion. On September 21, 2026, the parties, through counsel, appeared before the Court for a
hearing on the motion.
Whether to grant a motion to terminate a term of supervised release is a matter of
sentencing court discretion. Rhoades v. Judiscak, 676 F.3d 931, 933 (10th Cir. 2012). The court
may grant an early termination of supervised release after one year has elapsed so long as the Court
considers the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1), (a)(2)(B), (a)(2)(C), (a)(2)(D), (a)(4),
(a)(5), (a)(6), and (a)(7) and the release is in the interest of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1). Thus,
the Court must consider Defendant’s offense, history, and characteristics; deterrence; protection
for the public; educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in
the most effective manner; the kinds of sentence and the sentencing range established; any
Case 2:23-cr-01578-JMC Document 72 Filed 10/14/26 Page 1 of 2

2
pertinent policy statement; the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities; and the need to
provide restitution.
The Court has considered Defendant’s motion, considering the statutory text of § 3583(e).
It has thus considered the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1), (a)(2)(B), (a)(2)(C), (a)(2)(D),
(a)(4), (a)(5), (a)(6), and (a)(7). Defendant had several positive urinalysis results during the initial
phase of her supervision. 	Since the dismissal of the December 2024 petition for revocation in
August 2025, Defendant has complied with the conditions of supervised release set forth by the
Court—a fact the Court commends and deems relevant to its analysis. 	She now serves as the
president of her Oxford House and as the chapter president for all Oxford Houses in Las Cruces.
She was selected to attend the Oxford House World Convention and she reports having restored
relationships with her children, secured two jobs, and maintained independent transportation.
Given Defendant’s stability, compliance, sobriety, and leadership within her recovery community,
the Court believes early termination of supervised release is appropriate considering the factors set
forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1), (a)(2)(B), (a)(2)(C), (a)(2)(D), (a)(4), (a)(5), (a)(6), and (a)(7).
The Court also finds that the release is in the interest of justice
For the reasons stated above, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s unopposed motion for early
termination of supervised release (Doc. No. 68).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Entered for the Court
this the 14th day of October, 2026
/s/ Joel M. Carson III______
Joel M. Carson III
United States Circuit Judge
Sitting by Designation
Case 2:23-cr-01578-JMC Document 72 Filed 10/14/26 Page 2 of 2