-1-

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

BEAUMONT DIVISION

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. 

JAMEY PAUL LABOVE

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CASE NUMBER 1:23-CR-44

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON PETITION FOR WARRANT

FOR OFFENDER UNDER SUPERVISION

Pending is a “Petition for Warrant or Summons for Offender Under Supervision” filed

October 31, 2023, alleging that the Defendant, Jamey Paul LaBove, violated his conditions of 

supervised release. This matter is referred to the undersigned 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

LaBove was sentenced on December 10, 2014, before The Honorable Jorge A. Solis, of 

the Northern District of Texas, after pleading guilty to the offense of Felon in Possession of a 

Firearm, a Class C felony. This offense carried a statutory maximum imprisonment term of 10

years. The guideline imprisonment range, based on a total offense level of 12 and a criminal 

history category of VI, was 30 to 37 months. LaBove was subsequently sentenced to 36 months’ 

imprisonment followed by a three year term of supervised release subject to the standard 

conditions of release, plus special conditions to include drug after care, counseling programs for 

gambling addiction, financial disclosure, and a $100 special assessment.

Case 1:23-cr-00044-MAC-CLS Document 12 Filed 12/14/23 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:

38
-2-

II. The Period of Supervision

On February 18, 2022, LaBove completed his period of imprisonment and began service 

of the supervision term. His case was reassigned to the Honorable Marcia A. Crone in the 

Eastern District of Texas on July 25, 2023. His conditions of supervised release were modified 

on September 18, 2023, to prohibit him from entering two local businesses (Whole Electric 

located at 4970 W. Cardinal Drive, Beaumont, Texas, and All-Phase Electric, located at 5300 

West Parkway, Groves, Texas).

III. The Petition

United States Probation filed the Petition for Warrant for Offender Under Supervision 

raising six allegations. The petition alleges that LaBove violated the following conditions of 

release:

Allegation 1. The Defendant shall not commit another federal, state, or local 

crime.

Allegation 2. The Defendant shall not unlawfully possess a controlled substance.

Allegation 3. The Defendant shall not commit another federal, state, or local 

crime.

Allegation 4. The Defendant shall not commit another federal, state, or local 

crime.

Allegation 5. The Defendant shall not commit another federal, state, or local 

crime.

Allegation 6. The Defendant shall refrain from any unlawful use of a controlled 

substance.

IV. Proceedings

On December 7, 2023, 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 

Case 1:23-cr-00044-MAC-CLS Document 12 Filed 12/14/23 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:

39
-3-

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 sixth allegation that claimed he failed to refrain from the unlawful use of a 

controlled substance. In return, the parties agreed that he should serve a term of twenty-one (21)

months’ imprisonment, with no supervised release to follow.

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. 

Based on 5th Circuit law, the court can find that illicit drug use constitutes possession. 

Should the court find that LaBove violated his conditions of supervised release by possessing 

methamphetamine through use, he will be in violation of Texas Health & Safety Code § 481.115

Case 1:23-cr-00044-MAC-CLS Document 12 Filed 12/14/23 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:

40
-4-

and be guilty of committing a Grade B violation. U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(a)(2) indicates that upon a 

finding of a Grade B violation, the court may (A) revoke probation or supervised release; or (B) 

extend the term of probation or supervised release and/or modify the conditions of supervision.

According to U.S.S.G. § 7B1.1(a)1, if the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence 

that the Defendant violated conditions of supervision by failing to refrain from the unlawful use 

of a controlled substance, the Defendant will be guilty of committing a Grade B violation. 

U.S.S.G. § 7B1.4(a) provides that in the case of revocation of supervised release based on a 

Grade B violation and a criminal history category of VI, the policy statement imprisonment 

range is 21 to 27 months. However, because the statutory maximum imprisonment term is 2 

years, the guideline imprisonment range is 21 to 24 months.

U.S.S.G. § 7B1.1(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 

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);

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. Price, 519 F. App’x 560, 562 (11th Cir. 2013). 

Case 1:23-cr-00044-MAC-CLS Document 12 Filed 12/14/23 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:

41
-5-

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 violated a standard

condition of release that he failed to refrain from the unlawful use of a controlled substance. 

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. § 7B1.1(a), the undersigned finds that 

the Defendant violated a condition of supervised release. 

The undersigned has carefully considered each of the factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 

3583(e). The Defendant’s violation is a Grade B violation, and the criminal history category is 

VI. The policy statement range in the Guidelines Manual is 21 to 24 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 21

months, with no supervised release to follow.

VII. Recommendations

The court should find that the Defendant violated the allegation in the petition that he

violated a standard condition of release by failing to refrain from the use of a controlled 

Case 1:23-cr-00044-MAC-CLS Document 12 Filed 12/14/23 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:

42
-6-

substance. The petition should be granted and the Defendant’s supervised release should be 

revoked pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583. The Defendant should be sentenced to a term of 21

months’ imprisonment, with no supervised release to follow. The Defendant requested to serve 

his prison term at the Federal Correctional Institution in Oakdale, Louisiana. The Defendant’s 

request should be accommodated, if possible.

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.

Case 1:23-cr-00044-MAC-CLS Document 12 Filed 12/14/23 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:

43