In federal court, a revocation hearing is where a judge decides whether you broke a condition of supervised release and what to do about it. Many searches about revocation hearings are about state probation or parole. This page covers only federal supervised release, under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1 and 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3). Rule 32.1 also governs federal probation, which this site does not cover.
What happens at a revocation hearing?
The process usually has three steps under Rule 32.1:
- Initial appearance. If you are arrested on a violation, you must be taken before a magistrate judge without unnecessary delay. If you come in on a summons, the magistrate judge also proceeds under the rule. The judge tells you the alleged violation, your right to a lawyer, and, if you are in custody, your right to a preliminary hearing.
- Preliminary hearing. If you are held in custody for the alleged violation, a magistrate judge checks whether there is probable cause.
- Final revocation hearing. The court decides whether you violated a condition and, if so, what the response will be.
The advisory committee notes to the rule say a district judge must make the revocation decision if the original offense was a felony.
What is a preliminary revocation hearing?
If you are in custody for an alleged violation, a magistrate judge must promptly hold a hearing to decide whether there is probable cause, meaning a reasonable basis to believe a violation happened (Rule 32.1(b)(1)). You may waive this hearing.
The hearing must be recorded. You get notice of the hearing and the alleged violation, a chance to appear and present evidence, and, if you ask, a chance to question adverse witnesses unless the judge decides the interest of justice does not require them to appear. If the judge finds probable cause, the case goes to a revocation hearing. If not, the judge must dismiss the proceeding.
What is a final revocation hearing?
Unless you waive it, the court must hold the revocation hearing within a reasonable time in the district that has jurisdiction. Under Rule 32.1(b)(2), you are entitled to:
- written notice of the alleged violation;
- disclosure of the evidence against you;
- an opportunity to appear, present evidence, and question any adverse witness, unless the court decides the interest of justice does not require the witness to appear;
- notice of your right to hire a lawyer or to ask for an appointed lawyer if you can't afford one; and
- an opportunity to make a statement and present information in mitigation.
These rights grew out of Morrissey v. Brewer (1972), a parole case in which the Supreme Court set minimum due-process rules for revocation, such as written notice and a neutral decision-maker. The rule's advisory committee notes trace its hearing requirements to that case.
What standard of proof applies?
The judge may revoke if it "finds by a preponderance of the evidence" that you violated a condition (§ 3583(e)(3)). That means the judge must believe it is more likely than not that the violation happened. It is a lower bar than "beyond a reasonable doubt," the standard at a criminal trial.
Can hearsay be used at a revocation hearing?
Sometimes. Hearsay is a statement made outside the courtroom that is offered to prove what it says, such as a police report or what someone told your officer.
Rule 32.1(b)(2)(C) gives you the right to question adverse witnesses "unless the court determines that the interest of justice does not require the witness to appear." The advisory committee notes say the court should apply a balancing test: your interest in confronting the witness against the government's good cause for not producing the witness. The notes also say a revocation hearing is not a formal trial and the usual rules of evidence need not apply. For a case on this issue, see sentencing.net's note on hearsay at revocation.
What can the judge consider?
Section 3583(e) lists the factors the judge must consider from 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), such as your history, deterrence, protecting the public, and your need for treatment.
Treatment needs can shape conditions and alternatives to prison, but a court may not impose or lengthen a prison term to promote rehabilitation. In Tapia v. United States (2011), the Supreme Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 3582(a) "does not permit a sentencing court to impose or lengthen a prison term in order to foster a defendant's rehabilitation."
The Second Circuit applied that limit to a prison term imposed on revocation in United States v. Lifshitz (2d Cir. 2013). Recommending treatment and making a prison term longer so someone can finish treatment are different things.
The list in § 3583(e) leaves out § 3553(a)(2)(A) and § 3553(a)(3). In Esteras v. United States (2025), the Supreme Court held, 7–2, that a court deciding whether to revoke supervised release under § 3583(e) may not consider § 3553(a)(2)(A). That factor is retribution for the original crime: the need for the sentence to reflect how serious the offense was, to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment. The judge may still consider the nature of the offense for the purposes the statute does list, such as deterrence and public safety. Esteras did not decide which factors apply when revocation is required by § 3583(g).
The Guidelines point the same way. They call for an individualized assessment of any prison term (USSG §7C1.4(a)). Their commentary also says punishing new criminal conduct is not the primary goal of a revocation sentence (introductory commentary to Part C of USSG Chapter 7).
What happens after the revocation hearing?
If the judge finds no violation, supervision continues. If the judge finds a violation, the court can continue supervision, change your conditions, extend the term, or revoke it (USSG §7C1.3). See the judge's options.
If the court revokes:
- Prison time. The judge sets the length after an individualized assessment, looking at the recommended range in the revocation table (USSG §7C1.4(a)). The statute caps it based on the class of your original crime.
- Running with other sentences. The Guidelines say a revocation prison term generally should run consecutively to (after) any other prison sentence you are serving (USSG §7C1.4(b)).
- No credit for street time. "Street time" is the time you spent on supervision in the community. It does not count toward the revocation prison term (§ 3583(e)(3); USSG §7C1.6).
- More supervision. The judge may order a new term of supervised release after the prison term, within the limit in § 3583(h).
Can you be revoked after the term ends?
Only in a narrow situation. Under § 3583(i), the court's power to revoke continues after the term ends "for any period reasonably necessary" to decide matters that came up before it ended, but only if a warrant or summons based on an alleged violation was issued before the term ended. For a case on this rule, see sentencing.net's note on revocation after the term ends.
Does a new arrest pause supervised release?
Not by itself. Under 18 U.S.C. § 3624(e), the term does not run while you are imprisoned "in connection with a conviction" for a federal, state or local crime, unless that imprisonment is less than 30 days in a row.
In Mont v. United States (2019), the Supreme Court held that time held before trial on a new charge pauses the term if that time is later credited toward the sentence for the new conviction. See how long supervised release lasts.
Is there a jury at a revocation hearing?
Generally no. The statute has the judge find the violation by a preponderance of the evidence.
United States v. Haymond (2019) is a narrow exception. It involved § 3583(k), which required a mandatory prison term of at least five years when a judge found that a person required to register as a sex offender committed certain new crimes. Four Justices said applying that provision violated the jury-trial right. Justice Breyer agreed only that this specific provision was unconstitutional, because of how closely it resembled punishment for a new crime, and he declined to apply the jury-trial cases to supervised release revocations in general. Ordinary revocations under § 3583(e) are still decided by a judge.
If you or someone you love is facing a revocation hearing, see our supervised release violations page.
Does everyone in jail get a preliminary revocation hearing?
Not necessarily. Rule 32.1(b)(1) applies when "a person is in custody for violating a condition" of supervised release.
Being held on a new criminal charge is not always the same thing as being held for the alleged supervision violation. The kind of custody matters.
Under Rule 32.1(a)(6), you carry the burden of showing by clear and convincing evidence that you will not flee or pose a danger. Release before the hearing does not start from the idea that the government must prove you should be held.
A lawyer should look at why you are being held and whether there is a workable release plan, and do it quickly.
What did Esteras leave open?
It left open whether a court may sanction the breach of trust in the violation itself. Esteras bars a court deciding whether to revoke under § 3583(e) from relying on retribution for the original crime.
In footnote 5, the Court said it took "no position" on the Sentencing Commission's breach-of-trust view. The opinion also did not decide which factors apply when revocation is required by § 3583(g).
So it is not accurate to say that punishment can never matter at a revocation. Arguments about breach of trust, public safety and rehabilitation still have to be weighed under the law of your circuit.
How do you prepare for a revocation hearing?
A lawyer will usually separate the allegations you dispute from facts that may be admitted, and review the judgment and the petition. The lawyer will also identify needed witnesses or records, check the proposed grade and range, and look at detention and mitigation.
Challenging hearsay usually takes more than saying a police report is unreliable. The court's balancing test under Rule 32.1(b)(2)(C) matters.
If new criminal charges are also pending, what you say in one case may affect the other. Talk with your lawyer before you testify, admit anything, share treatment information or sign a waiver.
The lower standard of proof does not make the hearing informal or minor.
What should happen after the judge rules?
Ask your lawyer to review the written judgment, the prison term, any new term of supervision and the conditions that will apply. If an appeal may make sense, get advice right away.
Deadlines to appeal in criminal cases are short, and asking another firm for a consultation does not pause them. The exact deadline depends on the order and the case, so it is not given here.