Federal Probation and Supervised Release Violations Report by the United States Sentencing Commission July 2020

[www.ussc.gov – 7/2020]

This report provides information on violations of federal probation and supervised release using data collected by the United States Sentencing Commission. For the first time, the Commission is reporting data collected from documents related to revocation hearings. Combined with data the Commission regularly collects, this report analyzes the characteristics of supervision violations and the outcomes of violation proceedings provided in documents sent to the Commission by the courts.

As part of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, which created the Commission and charged it with establishing the federal sentencing guidelines system, Congress prospectively eliminated federal parole and established different supervision options in federal sentencing. Among other things, the Act made probation a sentence in itself, whereas probation previously functioned as a stay of the imposition or execution of a sentence. In addition, the Act created a new form of post-imprisonment supervision: supervised release. As part of its overall work in response to the Act, the Commission addressed the new supervision options in the federal sentencing guidelines. Specifically, Chapter Five and Chapter Seven of the Guidelines Manual provide guidelines and policy statements for federal courts to address terms and conditions of probation and supervised release and violations of each type of supervision.

Download a PDF of the full report from www.ussc.gov


Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  19. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Ok, what am I missing, I’ve been through this entire thing, and very conspicuously missing is a category of sex offenses. Drugs, Firearms, immigration, fraud and administrative make up over 85% of those studied and we aren’t any of those. I imagine we are dispersed between felony categories A,B,and C, but still, why do all others have categories but not the most despicable, horrendous, awful offense of all? I can only surmise that the study proved conclusively that our recidivism rate is so low that it invalidates all the punitive oversight, and therefore the committee decided to obscure it in the study or they could lose funding and perhaps have the entire registry under fire for being wasteful, punitive, and totally unnecessary.