USA v. Penaloza et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SHERMAN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

NARBEL SOLARIO PENALOZA (1)
§
§
§
§
§

NO. 4:11-cr-00006-ALM-BD

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This report and recommendation addresses a petition for revocation of the defendant’s
supervised release. Dkt. 1946 ( sealed).
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On April 30, 2012, United States District Judge Marcia A. Crone sentenced defendant Narbel
Solario Penaloza to 35 months of imprisonment followed by five years of supervised release.
Dkt. 1354 at 2–3; see Dkt. 1862 at 1 (reducing the prison term to 12 months). Penaloza’s term of
supervised release commenced January 12, 2018. See Dkt. 1946 at 1 (sealed).
In January 2019, a probation officer petitioned the court for a warrant, alleging that Penaloza
had violated two conditions of his supervised release. Dkt. 1946 at 1–2 (sealed). Specifically, the
petition alleged that Penaloza had violated conditions that required him to not commit another
federal, state, or local crime and to remain outside the United States after being deported. Id .
In support of those allegations, the petition asserted that, on January 5, 2019, Penaloza was
arrested for the offense of unlawful reentry into the United States. Id. A warrant for his arrest on
the petition to revoke his supervised release issued on January 24, 2019. Dkt. 1948. He was arrested
on that warrant on May 7, 2025. Dkt. 2030.
Penaloza made an initial appearance on the petition two days later, Minute Entry for May 9,
2025, and a final revocation hearing was held before me on May 23, 2025, Minute Entry for May
23, 2025. At the hearing, Penaloza pled true to all of the petition’s allegations. Id. He also
consented to revocation of his supervised release and waived his right to object to my proposed
Case 4:11-cr-00006-ALM-BD Document 2032 Filed 09/30/25 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

2

findings and recommendations. Id.; Dkt. 2022. The government requested a sentence of four
months of imprisonment with no supervised release to follow, which is within the federal
sentencing policy statements; the defendant agreed. After hearing argument from counsel, the
court announced what its recommendation would be.
RECOMMENDATION
In accordance with the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, and having considered both parties’
arguments, the court recommends that Penaloza’s supervised release be revoked based on
allegations one and two in the petition, Dkt. 1946 at 1–2 (sealed), and that Penaloza receive a time-
served sentence, with no additional term of supervised release to follow.
Case 4:11-cr-00006-ALM-BD Document 2032 Filed 09/30/25 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>