USA v. Adams, et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
LUFKIN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
BILLY DEWAYNE ADAMS
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CASE NUMBER 9:21-CR-37
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON PETITION FOR WARRANT
FOR OFFENDER UNDER SUPERVISION
Pending is a “Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender Under Supervision” filed
January 7, 2025, alleging that the Defendant, Billy Dewayne Adams, violated his conditions of
supervised release. This matter is referred to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States
Magistrate Judge, for review, hearing, and submission of a report with recommended findings of
fact and conclusions of law. See United States v. Rodriguez, 23 F.3d 919, 920 n.1 (5th Cir. 1994);
see also 18 U.S.C. § 3401(i) (2000); E.D. TEX. CRIM. R. CR-59.
I. The Original Conviction and Sentence
Adams was sentenced on September 22, 2022, before The Honorable Marcia A. Crone of
the Eastern District of Texas after pleading guilty to the offense of Bank Burglary; Aiding and
Abetting, a Class C felony. This offense carried a statutory maximum imprisonment term of 20
years. The guideline imprisonment range, based on a total offense level of 10 and a criminal
history category of IV, was 15 to 21 months. Adams was subsequently sentenced to 21 months’
imprisonment subject to the standard conditions of release, plus special conditions to include:
You must provide the probation officer with access to any requested financial information for
purposes of monitoring fine/restitution payments and employment.
Case 9:21-cr-00037-MAC-ZJH Document 86 Filed 02/04/26 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>

You must not incur new credit charges or open additional lines of credit without the approval of
the probation officer unless payment of any financial obligation ordered by the Court has been
paid in full.
You must participate in a program of testing and treatment for substance abuse and follow the
rules and regulations of that program until discharged. The probation officer, in consultation with
the treatment provider, will supervise your participation in the program.
You must pay any cost associated with treatment and testing.
You must acquire a high school equivalency certificate.
II. The Period of Supervision
On September 1, 2023, Adams completed his period of imprisonment and began service of
the supervision term. On September 30, 2024, Adams’ supervised release was revoked and he was
sentenced to 6 months’ imprisonment followed by 2 years of supervised release.
III. The Petition
United States Probation filed the Petition for Warrant for Offender Under Supervision
raising one allegation alleging that Adams failed to report to his probation officer as directed.
IV. Proceedings
On January 12, 2026, the undersigned convened a hearing pursuant to Rule 32.1 of the
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to hear evidence and arguments on whether the Defendant
violated conditions of supervised release, and the appropriate course of action for any such
violations.
At the revocation hearing, counsel for the Government and the Defendant announced an
agreement as to a recommended disposition regarding the revocation. The Defendant agreed to
plead “true” to the allegation that Adams failed to report to his probation officer as directed. In
return, the parties agreed that Adams should serve a term of 10 months’ imprisonment, with no
supervised release to follow. Adams’ counsel, David Barlow, advised the court that Adams was
Case 9:21-cr-00037-MAC-ZJH Document 86 Filed 02/04/26 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>

ordered to serve 6 months’ imprisonment, with two years of supervised release, on a prior
supervised release revocation. (See Dkt. 77, revocation judgment entered on September 30, 2024.)
However, Adams did not serve the full 6 months’ imprisonment because he mistakenly overserved
his term of imprisonment on the original offense by 365 days. Therefore, he was credited time on
the 6 month sentence imposed, which resulted in his release on October 31, 2024.
Probation filed the instant second Petition for Warrant for Offender Under Supervision on
January 7, 2025, and Adams was arrested on November 29, 2025. (Dkt. #79, 82.) At the time of
his January 12, 2026 revocation hearing, Adams had served 45 days in jail on the second revocation
petition. Therefore, Mr. Barlow contends—and the Government agrees—that Adams had
approximately 365 days’ jail credit on an agreed 305-day sentence (as of January 12, 2026).
V. Principles of Analysis
According to Title 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), the court may revoke a term of supervised
release and require the defendant to serve in prison all or part of the term of supervised release
authorized by statute for the offense that resulted in such term of supervised release without credit
for time previously served on post-release supervision, if the court, pursuant to the Federal Rules
of Criminal Procedure applicable to revocation of probation or supervised release, finds by a
preponderance of the evidence that the defendant violated a condition of supervised release, except
that a defendant whose term is revoked under this paragraph may not be required to serve on any
such revocation more than five years in prison if the offense that resulted in the term of supervised
release is a Class A felony, more than three years if such offense is a Class B felony, more than
two years in prison if such offense is a Class C or D felony, or more than one year in any other
case. The original offense of conviction was a Class C felony, therefore, the maximum
imprisonment sentence is 2 years.
Case 9:21-cr-00037-MAC-ZJH Document 86 Filed 02/04/26 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>

According to U.S.S.G. § 7C1.1(a)1, if the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence
that the Defendant violated conditions of supervision by failing to report to his probation officer
as directed, the Defendant will be guilty of committing a Grade C violation. U.S.S.G. § 7C1.3
indicates that upon a finding of non-compliance, the court should conduct an individualized
assessment and that revocation is generally appropriate for a Grade A violation, often appropriate
for a Grade B violation, and may be appropriate for a Grade C violation.
U.S.S.G. § 7C1.5 provides that in the case of revocation of supervised release based on a
Grade C violation and a criminal history category of IV, the policy statement imprisonment range
is 6 to 12 months.
U.S.S.G. § 7C1.4(a) states that the court shall conduct an individualized assessment to
determine the appropriate length of the term of imprisonment, given the recommended range of
imprisonment set forth in § 7C1.5.
U.S.S.G. § 7C1.1(b) indicates where there is more than one violation of the conditions of
supervision, or the violation includes conduct that constitutes more than one offense, the grade of
the violation is determined by the violation having the most serious grade.
In determining the Defendant’s sentence, the court shall consider:
1. The nature and circumstance of the offense and the history and characteristics of the
defendant; see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1);
2. The need for the sentence imposed: to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct;
to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and to provide the Defendant
with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, other corrective treatment
in the most effective manner; see 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553 (a)(2)(B)-(D);
3. Applicable guidelines and policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission,
for the appropriate application of the provisions when modifying or revoking
1. All of the policy statements in Chapter 7 that govern sentences imposed upon revocation of supervised release are
non-binding. See U.S.S.G. Ch. 7 Pt. A; United States v. Bradberry, 360 F. App’x. 508, 509 (5th Cir. 2009).
Case 9:21-cr-00037-MAC-ZJH Document 86 Filed 02/04/26 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>

supervised release pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 994(a)(3), that are in effect on the date the
defendant is sentenced; see 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(4); see also 28 U.S.C. § 924(A)(3);
4. Any pertinent policy statement issued by the Sentencing Commission, pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 994(a)(2), that is in effect on the date the defendant is sentenced; see 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a)(5); and
5. The need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar
records who have been found guilty of similar conduct; see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6).
6. The need to provide restitution to any victims of the offense.
18 U.S.C. §§ 3583(e) and 3553(a).
VI. Application
The Defendant pled “true” to the petition’s allegation that he failed to report to his
probation officer as instructed. Based upon the Defendant’s plea of “true” to this allegation of the
Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender Under Supervision and U.S.S.G. § 7C1.3, the
undersigned finds that the Defendant violated a standard condition of supervised release.
The undersigned has carefully conducted an individualized assessment and considered
each of the factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e). The Defendant’s violation is a Grade C violation
and the criminal history category is IV. The policy statement range in the Guidelines Manual is 6
to 12 months. The Defendant did not comply with the conditions of supervision and has
demonstrated an unwillingness to adhere to conditions of supervision.
Consequently, incarceration appropriately addresses the Defendant’s violation. The
sentencing objectives of punishment, deterrence and rehabilitation along with the aforementioned
statutory sentencing factors will best be served by a prison sentence of 10 months with no
supervised release to follow.
VII. Recommendations
The court should find that the Defendant violated the first allegation in the petition that he
failed to report to his probation officer as directed. The petition should be granted, and the
Case 9:21-cr-00037-MAC-ZJH Document 86 Filed 02/04/26 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>

Defendant’s supervised release should be revoked pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583. The Defendant
should be sentenced to a term of 10 months’ imprisonment, with no supervised release to follow.
The Bureau of Prisons should consider the jail-credits arising from his prior over-served term of
imprisonment when calculating this sentence.
VIII. Objections
At the close of the revocation hearing, the Defendant, defense counsel, and counsel for the
government each signed a standard form waiving their right to object to the proposed findings and
recommendations contained in this report, consenting to revocation of supervised release, and
consenting to the imposition of the above sentence recommended in this report (involving all
conditions of supervised release, if applicable). The Defendant also waived his right to be present
and speak and have his counsel present and speak before the district court imposes the
recommended sentence. Therefore, the court may act on this report and recommendation
immediately.
_________________________
Zack Hawthorn
United States Magistrate Judge
SIGNED this 4th day of February, 2026.
Case 9:21-cr-00037-MAC-ZJH Document 86 Filed 02/04/26 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>