Reported / Citable
Background
John Steven Stark was convicted of bank robbery, a Class C felony, and sentenced in September 2012 to 169 months’ imprisonment followed by three years of supervised release. His criminal history placed him at Category VI — the highest tier under the Sentencing Guidelines. He began serving his supervised release term on June 7, 2024, after completing his prison sentence.
United States Probation filed a First Amended Petition for Warrant on March 23, 2026, alleging three violations of Stark’s supervised release conditions: two counts of committing a new federal, state, or local crime, and one count of failing to refrain from unlawful use of a controlled substance. The petition was referred to Magistrate Judge Christine L. Stetson for a hearing and report and recommendation.
At a revocation hearing on June 2, 2026, the parties announced a negotiated disposition. Stark agreed to plead “true” to the controlled substance allegation — a Grade C violation — in exchange for the government’s agreement on a recommended 18-month prison sentence. Both sides, along with defense counsel, waived their right to object to the magistrate’s report and recommendation.
The Court’s Holding
Magistrate Judge Stetson found by a preponderance of the evidence that Stark violated a mandatory condition of his supervised release by failing to refrain from unlawful use of a controlled substance. The applicable Sentencing Guidelines policy statement range for a Grade C violation with a Criminal History Category VI was 8 to 14 months. The magistrate recommended an upward departure to 18 months — above that range — noting that Stark’s concurrent state convictions in Liberty County, Texas (Cause Nos. 24DC-CR-00783 and 24DC-CR-00772) reflected conduct rising to a Grade B violation with a correspondingly higher guideline range, and that the agreed-upon 18 months effectively splits the difference between the Grade B and Grade C ranges.
The recommended sentence of 18 months is to run consecutively to the Liberty County state sentences and concurrently with the revocation sentence imposed in the related federal case, Eastern District of Texas Case No. 1:12CR11-1. No additional supervised release is to follow. The magistrate also noted that Stark’s outstanding restitution balance of $1,512.01 remains payable. Because all parties waived objections at the close of the hearing and consented to the recommended sentence — including waiving Stark’s right to allocution before the district court — the magistrate recommended that the district court act on the report immediately.
Key Takeaways
- Stark’s supervised release was revoked based solely on the Grade C controlled substance violation; the two new-crime allegations were resolved by agreement without separate findings.
- The recommended 18-month sentence exceeds the Guidelines policy statement range of 8–14 months for a Grade C/Category VI offender; the magistrate justified the upward departure by reference to the underlying state convictions and the concurrent federal revocation proceeding.
- All parties signed waivers at the close of the revocation hearing, forfeiting the right to object to the report and recommendation and allowing the district court to impose the sentence without a further hearing.
- The maximum statutory revocation sentence for a Class C felony under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3) is two years; the recommended 18-month term falls within that cap.
Why It Matters
This report and recommendation illustrates how courts handle negotiated supervised release revocations where a defendant’s broader criminal conduct — here, new state felony convictions — can justify a revocation sentence above the technical Guidelines range for the admitted violation. By pleading “true” to only the drug-use allegation while the parties agreed to treat the sentence as reflecting the more serious Grade B conduct, the disposition reflects a common federal practice of packaging multiple enforcement concerns into a single agreed revocation sentence.
The case also highlights the procedural efficiency available when all parties consent: by waiving objections and allocution rights on the record, the parties enabled immediate district court action on the magistrate’s recommendation, bypassing the standard 14-day objection window and eliminating the need for a separate sentencing appearance before the district judge.