USA v. Brewer

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
MICHAEL ANTHONY BREWER
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CASE NO. 6:26-CR-00001-JCB-KNM-1
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On February 10, 2026, the court conducted a hearing to consider the government’s petition
to revoke the supervised release of Defendant Michael Anthony Brewer. The government was
represented by Ryan Locker, Assistant United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Texas,
and Defendant was represented by Jonathan Hyatt, Federal Public Defender.
Defendant originally pled guilty to the offenses of Conspiracy to Receive, Possess, and
Dispose of Stolen Firearms, a Class D felony, and Possession of Stolen Firearms, a Class C felony.
The conspiracy offense, enumerated in Defendant’s indictment as count 1, carried a statutory
maximum imprisonment term of 5 years. The possession offense, enumerated in Defendant’s
indictment as count 8, carried a statutory maximum imprisonment term of 10 years. The guideline
imprisonment range, based on a total offense level of 23 and a criminal history category of IV, was
60 months for count 1 and 70 to 87 months for count 8. On November 14, 2007, U.S. District
Judge Terrence W. Boyle of the Eastern District of North Carolina sentenced Defendant to 55
months imprisonment followed by 3 years of supervised release for count 1 in addition to 55
months imprisonment followed by 3 years of supervised release for count 8. Both sentences were
Case 6:26-cr-00001-JCB-KNM Document 13 Filed 02/11/26 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
to run concurrently, subject to the standard conditions of release, plus special conditions to include
credit restrictions, financial disclosure, and payment of a $200.00 special assessment fee. On
December 4, 2013, pursuant to a downward departure for substantial assistance, Defendant was
resentenced to 30 months imprisonment followed by 3 years of supervised release for count 1 in
addition to 30 months imprisonment followed by 3 years of supervised release for count 8. These
sentences were to run concurrently, subject to the same conditions stated previously. On December
18, 2023, Defendant completed his period of imprisonment and began service of the supervision
term in the Eastern District of North Carolina. On January 17, 2025, Defendant’s supervision was
transferred to the to the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division. On January 8, 2026, jurisdiction
over the case was transferred to the Eastern District of Texas, and the case was reassigned to U.S.
District Judge J. Campbell Barker of the Eastern District of Texas.
Under the terms of supervised release, Defendant was required to report to his probation
officer as directed by the court or probation officer and to submit a truthful and complete written
report within the first five days of each month. In Allegation 2 of its petition, the government
alleges that Defendant violated his conditions of supervised release on or about October 2025,
December 2025, and January 2026 when Defendant failed to submit a monthly report as instructed
within the first five days of each month.
If the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendant violated the conditions
of supervised release by failing to submit monthly reports as instructed within the first five days
of each month for October 2025, December 2025, and January 2026, Defendant will have
committed a Grade C violation. U.S.S.G. § 7B1.1(a). Upon a finding of a Grade C violation, the
court may revoke supervised release. U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(a)(1). Considering Defendant’s criminal
Case 6:26-cr-00001-JCB-KNM Document 13 Filed 02/11/26 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:
<pageID>

3
history category of IV, the guideline imprisonment range for a Grade C violation is 6 to 12 months.
U.S.S.G. § 7B1.4(a).
At the hearing, the parties indicated that they had come to an agreement to resolve the
petition whereby Defendant would plead true to the Grade C violation of the condition requiring
Defendant to report to his probation officer as directed by the court or probation officer and to
submit a truthful and complete written report within the first five days of each month asserted as
Allegation 2 in the government’s petition. In exchange, the government recommended to the court
that Defendant be imprisoned for a term of 11 months imprisonment with no supervised release to
follow for count 1 in addition to 11 months imprisonment with no supervised release to follow for
count 8. The government recommended that these sentences run concurrently.
The court therefore RECOMMENDS that Defendant’s plea of true to Allegation 2 be
accepted, that he be imprisoned for a term of 11 months with no period of supervised release to
follow for count 1, and that he be imprisoned for a term of 11 months with no period of supervised
release to follow for count 8. The court additionally RECOMMENDS that these sentences run
concurrently. The court further RECOMMENDS that Defendant serve his sentence at FCI
Texarkana, TX or FCI Seagoville, TX, if available. The parties waived their right to objections so
this matter shall be immediately presented to the District Judge for consideration.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 11th day of February, 2026.
Case 6:26-cr-00001-JCB-KNM Document 13 Filed 02/11/26 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:
<pageID>