United States v. Christopher Zoukis ( 2023 )

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6263 Doc: 77 Filed: 12/19/2023 Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-6263
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CHRISTOPHER HARDY ZOUKIS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, Chief District Judge. (1:07-cr-00091-MR-WCM-1)
Argued: December 5, 2023 Decided: December 19, 2023
Before WILKINSON, KING, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ARGUED: Jillian Marie Lesley, ELIZABETH FRANKLIN-BEST, P.C., Columbia,
South Carolina, for Appellant. Elizabeth Margaret Greenough, OFFICE OF THE UNITED
STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. ON BRIEF:
Christopher R. Geel, GEEL LAW FIRM LLC, Charleston, South Carolina; Elizabeth A.
Franklin-Best, Ranee Saunders, ELIZABETH FRANKLIN-BEST, P.C., Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellant. Dena J. King, United States Attorney, OFFICE OF UNITED
STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6263 Doc: 77 Filed: 12/19/2023 Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Appellant Christopher Hardy Zoukis appeals the district court’s order denying his
motion for early termination of supervised release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e). Also
pending before the court is the Government’s motion to dismiss Appellant’s appeal. That
motion is denied.
On the merits, Appellant contends the district court abused its discretion when it
denied his motion for early termination of supervised release. Appellant pled guilty on
December 26, 2007 to one count of knowingly possessing child pornography in violation
of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252(a)(4)(B) and 2252(b)(2) and one count of knowingly receiving child
pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252(a)(2), (b)(1), and 2256(8)(A). He was
charged with these offenses while on state supervised probation for a prior felony
conviction, taking indecent liberties with a child. Appellant was sentenced on
September 4, 2008 to 151 months of imprisonment and six years of supervised release.
Appellant served his prison term, and his supervised release began on October 12,
2018. On March 17, 2021, Appellant moved for early termination of his supervised release
after having served approximately 30 of 72 months. Although the Government initially
lodged an objection to Appellant’s motion for early termination, it ultimately withdrew that
objection when Appellant passed a polygraph examination.
The district court denied Appellant’s motion on February 14, 2022. The court
determined Appellant’s request was unwarranted based upon Appellant’s conduct, the
interest of justice, and the relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)
(providing a court may terminate a term of supervised release “after the expiration of one
2
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6263 Doc: 77 Filed: 12/19/2023 Pg: 3 of 3
year of supervised release,” “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),” when “warranted by the
conduct of the defendant released and the interest of justice”). However, the district court
denied Appellant’s motion without prejudice and encouraged him to refile based on the
considerable efforts Appellant had made toward rehabilitation.
We hold the district court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v. Pregent,
190 F.3d 279, 282 (4th Cir. 1999) (reviewing denial of early termination under § 3583(e)
for abuse of discretion). Appellant’s history and characteristics, the nature and
circumstances of his offenses, the need to protect the public, and the importance of
avoiding unwarranted sentence disparities weighed against early termination at this
juncture.
Therefore, the district court’s order denying without prejudice Appellant’s motion
for early termination of supervised release is
AFFIRMED.
3