MEMORANDUM AND ORDER By letter dated March 24, 2019, Hector Reyes (“Reyes” or “defendant”) seeks early termination of his period of supervised release.He pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 5 or more kilograms of cocaine, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§846 and 841(b)(1)(A), and sentenced by me to 72 months of incarceration and four years of supervised release on January 14, 2016. Upon his release from prison on July 31, 2017, his supervision was transferred from the Eastern District of New York to the Southern District of Texas given his relocation to that venue. The four year period of supervision is scheduled to terminate on or about July 31, 2021.The parties have addressed the defendant’s application on the merits. However, the transfer of jurisdiction was done pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3605 with the Southern District of Texas accepting the transfer. The question thus arises whether I have jurisdiction to entertain Reyes’ request or whether that power rests exclusively with the transferee court. It would seem that the latter is the case. See United States v. Clark, 405 Fed. Appx. 89, 92-93 (8th Cir. 2010)(“[A]t the time the district court denied the amended motion for early termination of supervised release on February 23, 2010 — and subsequently ordered that Clark could file his notice of appeal out of time — it no longer possessed jurisdiction over Clark because a transfer of jurisdiction means that the ‘transferee court…take[s] full jurisdiction from the transferor court.’ Fernandez, 379 F.3d [270] at 275 [(5th Cir. 2004)]; see also United States v. D’Amario, 178 Fed. Appx. 151, 152 (3d Cir. 2006)(unpublished per curiam)(‘On May 2, 2003, the District of New Jersey transferred jurisdiction over [the defendant's] supervised release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3605 to the District of Rhode Island…. Thus, the District of New Jersey no longer has jurisdiction to provide the relief that he seeks and properly denied his motion.’)”).Notwithstanding my view as expressed above I would like to afford counsel an opportunity to be heard on this threshold issue. Defendant’s attorney shall file a letter brief on or before May 17, 2019, concerning the jurisdictional question, with government’s response due one week thereafter, i.e. by May 24, 2019.Dated: May 9, 2019Central Islip, New York.
