USA v. Gordon

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 19-20694-CR-MOORE/D’ANGELO
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
vs.
CHRISTOPHER MARTIN
GORDON,
Defendant.
________________________________/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON SUPERVISED RELEASE VIOLATIONS
THIS CAUSE is before the Court following the referral of this action to the undersigned
Magistrate Judge to take all necessary and proper action as required by law with respect to any and
all violations of Supervised Release as to Defendant Christopher Martin Gordon (“Defendant”)
(DE 68). 	A Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender Under Supervision (“Petition”),
detailing thirteen alleged violations of Defendant’s Supervised Release, was submitted to the Court
on September 16, 2025 and an arrest warrant subsequently issued (DE 60, 61). Defendant made
his initial appearance on October 31, 2025, and the Parties stipulated to detention with the right to
revisit (DE 67).
The Court held a status conference in this matter on November 19, 2025, at which the
Parties reached an agreed-upon disposition with the concurrence of the United States Probation
Office (DE 72). Specifically, the Parties stated that Defendant admits to violations one through
nine (1-9) and thirteen (13) in the Petition, and the Government will dismiss violations ten through
twelve (10-12) at sentencing. The Court placed Defendant under oath and after a brief colloquy,
the Court determined that Defendant is fully competent and capable of making an informed
decision and that his admission to violations one through nine (1-9) and thirteen (13) is knowing
Case 1:19-cr-20694-KMM Document 75 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/21/2025 Page 1 of 3

2
and voluntary. 	Defendant was advised that the maximum penalty he faces for violations one
through nine (1-9) and thirteen (13) is two (2) years’ imprisonment. Defendant acknowledged that
he understands the maximum penalty. Defendant acknowledged that he understands his right to
an evidentiary hearing on the violations in the Petition and all rights associated with a hearing.
Defendant acknowledged that if his admission to violations one through nine (1-9) and thirteen
(13) is accepted, all that will remain is a sentencing hearing to determine the final disposition.
On November 19, 2025, Defendant filed a Notice of Admission of Supervised Release
Violations (DE 74). In the Notice, Defendant stated that he admits to violations one through nine
(1-9) and thirteen (13) in the Petition (id.). The Government filed a Notice of Intent to Dismiss
Supervised Release Violation the same day (DE 73). The Government stated that it will dismiss
violations ten through twelve (10-12) in the Petition at sentencing (id.). Based on the foregoing,
the undersigned respectfully recommends that the Court set the matter for a final revocation hearing
and sentencing and accept Defendant’s admission of guilt to violations one through nine (1-9) and
thirteen (13), as set forth in the Petition.
The Parties will have fourteen (14) days from the date of service of this Report and
Recommendation within which to file written objections, if any, for consideration by the United
States District Judge. 	Failure to timely file objections will bar a de novo determination by the
District Judge of anything in this Report and Recommendation and shall constitute a waiver of a
party’s “right to challenge on appeal the district court’s order based on unobjected-to factual
Case 1:19-cr-20694-KMM Document 75 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/21/2025 Page 2 of 3

3
and 	legal conclusions.” 11th Cir. R. 3-1 (2016); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see also Harrigan v.
Metro-Dade Police Dep’t Station #4, 977 F.3d 1185, 1191–92 (11th Cir. 2020).
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED in Chambers in Miami, Florida on this 21st day of
November, 2025.
____________________________________
ELLEN F. D’ANGELO
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
cc: 	All Counsel of Record
Case 1:19-cr-20694-KMM Document 75 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/21/2025 Page 3 of 3