U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3

Conditions of Supervised Release

Read at: USSCussc.gov CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Mandatory Conditions

(1) The defendant shall not commit another federal, state or local offense (see 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d)).

(2) The defendant shall not unlawfully possess a controlled substance (see 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d)).

(3) The defendant who is convicted for a domestic violence crime as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 3561(b) for the first time shall attend a public, private, or private non-profit offender rehabilitation program that has been approved by the court, in consultation with a State Coalition Against Domestic Violence or other appropriate experts, if an approved program is available within a 50-mile radius of the legal residence of the defendant (see 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d)).

(4) The defendant shall refrain from any unlawful use of a controlled substance and submit to one drug test within 15 days of release on supervised release and at least two periodic drug tests thereafter (as determined by the court) for use of a controlled substance, but the condition stated in this paragraph may be ameliorated or suspended by the court for any individual defendant if the defendant’s presentence report or other reliable information indicates a low risk of future substance abuse by the defendant (see 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d)).

(5) If a fine is imposed and has not been paid upon release to supervised release, the defendant shall adhere to an installment schedule to pay that fine (see 18 U.S.C. § 3624(e)).

(6) The defendant shall (A) make restitution in accordance with 18 U.S.C. §§ 3663 and 3663A, or any other statute authorizing a sentence of restitution; and (B) pay the assessment imposed in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3013. If there is a court-established payment schedule for making restitution or paying the assessment (see 18 U.S.C. § 3572(d)), the defendant shall adhere to the schedule.

(7) If the defendant is required to register under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, the defendant shall comply with the requirements of that Act (see 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d)).

(8) The defendant shall submit to the collection of a DNA sample from the defendant at the direction of the United States Probation Office if the collection of such a sample is authorized pursuant to section 3 of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 (34 U.S.C. § 40702).

(b) Discretionary Conditions

(1) In General.—The court should conduct an individualized assessment to determine what, if any, other conditions of supervised release are warranted.

Such conditions are warranted to the extent that they (A) are reasonably related to (i) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant; (ii) the need for the sentence imposed to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct; (iii) the need to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and (iv) the need to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner; and (B) involve no greater deprivation of liberty than is reasonably necessary for the purposes set forth above and are consistent with any pertinent policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d).

(2) ‘Standard’ Conditions (Policy Statement)

The following are "standard" conditions of supervised release, which the court may modify, expand, or omit in appropriate cases:

(A) The defendant shall report to the probation office in the federal judicial district where he or she is authorized to reside within 72 hours of release from imprisonment, unless the probation officer instructs the defendant to report to a different probation office or within a different time frame.

(B) After initially reporting to the probation office, the defendant will receive instructions from the court or the probation officer about how and when to report to the probation officer, and the defendant shall report to the probation officer as instructed.

(C) The defendant shall not knowingly leave the federal judicial district where he or she is authorized to reside without first getting permission from the court or the probation officer.

(D) The defendant shall answer truthfully the questions asked by the probation officer.

(E) The defendant shall live at a place approved by the probation officer. If the defendant plans to change where he or she lives or anything about his or her living arrangements (such as the people the defendant lives with), the defendant shall notify the probation officer at least 10 days before the change. If notifying the probation officer at least 10 days in advance is not possible due to unanticipated circumstances, the defendant shall notify the probation officer within 72 hours of becoming aware of a change or expected change.

(F) The defendant shall allow the probation officer to visit the defendant at any time at his or her home or elsewhere, and the defendant shall permit the probation officer to take any items prohibited by the conditions of the defendant's supervision that he or she observes in plain view.

(G) The defendant shall work full time (at least 30 hours per week) at a lawful type of employment, unless the probation officer excuses the defendant from doing so. If the defendant does not have full-time employment he or she shall try to find full-time employment, unless the probation officer excuses the defendant from doing so. If the defendant plans to change where the defendant works or anything about his or her work (such as the position or the job responsibilities), the defendant shall notify the probation officer at least 10 days before the change. If notifying the probation officer in advance is not possible due to unanticipated circumstances, the defendant shall notify the probation officer within 72 hours of becoming aware of a change or expected change.

(H) The defendant shall not communicate or interact with someone the defendant knows is engaged in criminal activity. If the defendant knows someone has been convicted of a felony, the defendant shall not knowingly communicate or interact with that person without first getting the permission of the probation officer.

(I) If the defendant is arrested or questioned by a law enforcement officer, the defendant shall notify the probation officer within 72 hours.

(J) The defendant shall not own, possess, or have access to a firearm, ammunition, destructive device, or dangerous weapon (i.e., anything that was designed, or was modified for, the specific purpose of causing bodily injury or death to another person, such as nunchakus or tasers).

(K) The defendant shall not act or make any agreement with a law enforcement agency to act as a confidential human source or informant without first getting the permission of the court.

(L) If the probation officer determines that the defendant poses a risk to another person (including an organization), the probation officer may require the defendant to notify the person about the risk and the defendant shall comply with that instruction. The probation officer may contact the person and confirm that the defendant has notified the person about the risk.

(M) The defendant shall follow the instructions of the probation officer related to the conditions of supervision.

(3) "Special" Conditions (Policy Statement)

One or more conditions from the following non-exhaustive list of "special" conditions of supervised release may be appropriate in a particular case, including in the circumstances described therein:

(A) Support of Dependents

(i) If the defendant has one or more dependents — a condition specifying that the defendant shall support his or her dependents.

(ii) If the defendant is ordered by the government to make child support payments or to make payments to support a person caring for a child — a condition specifying that the defendant shall make the payments and comply with the other terms of the order.

(B) Debt Obligations

If an installment schedule of payment of restitution or a fine is imposed — a condition prohibiting the defendant from incurring new credit charges or opening additional lines of credit without approval of the probation officer unless the defendant is in compliance with the payment schedule.

If the court imposes an order of restitution, forfeiture, or notice to victims, or orders the defendant to pay a fine — a condition requiring the defendant to provide the probation officer access to any requested financial information.

(D) Substance Abuse

If the court has reason to believe that the defendant is an abuser of narcotics, other controlled substances or alcohol — (i) a condition requiring the defendant to participate in a program approved by the United States Probation Office for substance abuse, which program may include testing to determine whether the defendant has reverted to the use of drugs or alcohol; and (ii) a condition specifying that the defendant shall not use or possess alcohol. If participation in a substance abuse program is required, the length of the term of supervised release should take into account the length of time necessary for the probation office to judge the success of the program.

(E) Mental Health Program Participation

If the court has reason to believe that the defendant is in need of psychological or psychiatric treatment — a condition requiring that the defendant participate in a mental health program approved by the United States Probation Office.

(F) Deportation

If (i) the defendant and the United States entered into a stipulation of deportation pursuant to section 238(c)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. § 1228(c)(5)*); or (ii) in the absence of a stipulation of deportation, if, after notice and hearing pursuant to such section, the Attorney General demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that the alien is deportable — a condition ordering deportation by a United States district court or a United States magistrate judge.

*So in original. Probably should be 8 U.S.C. § 1228(d)(5).

(G) Sex Offenses

If the instant offense of conviction is a sex offense—

(i) A condition requiring the defendant to participate in a program approved by the United States Probation Office for the treatment and monitoring of sex offenders.

(ii) A condition limiting the use of a computer or an interactive computer service in cases in which the defendant used such items.

(iii) A condition requiring the defendant to submit to a search, at any time, with or without a warrant, and by any law enforcement or probation officer, of the defendant’s person and any property, house, residence, vehicle, papers, computer, other electronic communication or data storage devices or media, and effects upon reasonable suspicion concerning a violation of a condition of supervised release or unlawful conduct by the defendant, or by any probation officer in the lawful discharge of the officer’s supervision functions.

(iv) A condition prohibiting the defendant from communicating, or otherwise interacting, with any victim of the offense, either directly or through someone else.

(H) Unpaid Restitution, Fines, or Special Assessments

If the defendant has any unpaid amount of restitution, fines, or special assessments, the defendant shall notify the probation officer of any material change in the defendant’s economic circumstances that might affect the defendant’s ability to pay.

(I) Educational or Vocational Training

If the court has reason to believe that a course of study or vocational training would be appropriate and would equip the defendant for suitable employment, a condition specifying that the defendant participate in a General Education Development (or similar) program, vocational training, or skills training, unless the probation officer excuses the defendant from doing so.

(J) Victim Contact

If there is an identifiable victim of the offense, a condition prohibiting the defendant from communicating, or otherwise interacting, with any of the victims, either directly or through someone else.

(K) Community Confinement

Residence in a community treatment center, halfway house or similar facility may be imposed as a condition of supervised release. See §5F1.1 (Community Confinement).

(L) Home Detention

Home detention may be imposed as a condition of supervised release, but only as a substitute for imprisonment. See §5F1.2 (Home Detention).

(M) Community Service

Community service may be imposed as a condition of supervised release. See §5F1.3 (Community Service).

(N) Occupational Restrictions

Occupational restrictions may be imposed as a condition of supervised release. See §5F1.5 (Occupational Restrictions).

(O) Curfew

A condition imposing a curfew may be imposed if the court concludes that restricting the defendant to his place of residence during evening and nighttime hours is necessary to protect the public from crimes that the defendant might commit during those hours, or to assist in the rehabilitation of the defendant. Electronic monitoring may be used as a means of surveillance to ensure compliance with a curfew order.

(P) Intermittent Confinement

Intermittent confinement (custody for intervals of time) may be ordered as a condition of supervised release during the first year of supervised release, but only for a violation of a condition of supervised release in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(2) and only when facilities are available. See §5F1.8 (Intermittent Confinement).

Commentary

Application Notes:

1. Individualized Assessment.—When conducting an individualized assessment under this section, the court must consider the same factors used to determine whether to impose a term of supervised release, and shall impose conditions of supervision not required by statute only to the extent such conditions meet the requirements listed at 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d). See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(c), (d); Application Note 1 to §5D1.1 (Imposition of a Term of Supervised Release).

2. Application of Subsection (b)(2)(D).—Although the condition in subsection (b)(2)(D) requires the defendant to "answer truthfully" the questions asked by the probation officer, a defendant's legitimate invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination in response to a probation officer's question shall not be considered a violation of this condition.

3. Application of Subsection (b)(3)(G).—For purposes of subsection (b)(3)(G):

"Sex offense" means (A) an offense, perpetrated against a minor, under (i) chapter 109A of title 18, United States Code; (ii) chapter 110 of such title, not including a recordkeeping offense; (iii) chapter 117 of such title, not including transmitting information about a minor or filing a factual statement about an alien individual; (iv) an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 1201; or (v) an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 1591; or (B) an attempt or a conspiracy to commit any offense described in subparagraphs (A)(i) through (v) of this note. Such term does not include an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 2250 (Failure to register).

"Minor" means (A) an individual who had not attained the age of 18 years; (B) an individual, whether fictitious or not, who a law enforcement officer represented to a participant (i) had not attained the age of 18 years; and (ii) could be provided for the purposes of engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or (C) an undercover law enforcement officer who represented to a participant that the officer had not attained the age of 18 years.

Historical Note: Effective November 1, 1987. Amended effective November 1, 1989 (amendments 276, 277, and 302); November 1, 1997 (amendment 569); November 1, 1998 (amendment 584); November 1, 2000 (amendment 605); November 1, 2001 (amendment 615); November 1, 2002 (amendments 644 and 646); November 1, 2004 (amendment 664); November 1, 2007 (amendments 701 and 711); November 1, 2009 (amendment 733); November 1, 2016 (amendment 803); November 1, 2018 (amendments 812 and 813); November 1, 2025 (amendments 835 and 836).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 725 cases (214 in the last 5 years), 1991–2026 · leading case: United States v. Perazza-Mercado, 553 F.3d 65 (1st Cir. 2009).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Perazza-Mercado, 553 F.3d 65 (1st Cir. 2009). · cites it 24× “See generally U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3(a). However, the court, in its discretion, also imposed a number of other conditions of supervised release, including all of the standard conditions of supervision described in U.”

United States v. Parrish Kappes, 782 F.3d 828 (7th Cir. 2015). · cites it 8× “§§ 3563(a)-(b), 3583(d); U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3. Some of the discretionary conditions are called “standard,” U.”

United States v. Sims, 92 F.4th 115 (2d Cir. 2024). · cites it 10× “The 2 policy statements are set forth in U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3 and include the Sentencing 3 Commission’s recommendations on certain conditions, such as the standard 4 conditions, and when they should be imposed.”

United States v. Rosie Diggles, 957 F.3d 551 (5th Cir. 2020). · cites it 4× “4 The Guidelines categories, see U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3, may retain significance in other contexts.”

United States v. Melendez-Santana, 353 F.3d 93 (1st Cir. 2003). · cites it 8× “U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3. The seven mandatory conditions include basic correctional provisions such as “the defendant shall not commit another federal, state or local offense,” id.”

United States v. York, 357 F.3d 14 (1st Cir. 2004). · cites it 7× “” See also U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3(b). In this case, the facts are drawn from the pre-sentence report, as amended to reflect York’s minor objections, and from the transcript of the sentencing hearing.”

United States v. John Lee, 888 F.3d 503 (D.C. Cir. 2018). · cites it 8× “The Sentencing Guidelines separately identify the “mandatory,” “standard,” and “special” conditions for supervised release and refer generally to other conditions that may be imposed, subject to two limitations, U.”

United States v. Robert D. McKissic, 428 F.3d 719 (7th Cir. 2005). · cites it 8× “U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3; see 18 U.S.C. §§ 3583 (d), 3553(a)(1), 3553(a)(2)(B-D).”

United States v. Prochner, 417 F.3d 54 (1st Cir. 2005). · cites it 7× “Nothing contained in the statute underlying U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3 limits the condition of sex offender treatment just to individuals convicted of sex offenses.”

United States v. Kimler, 335 F.3d 1132 (10th Cir. 2003). · cites it 4× “USSG § 5D1.3(a)(8) (2002 ed.). Inexplicably, the briefs of both parties to this appeal proceed in large part on the assumption that the 2001 edition of the Guidelines apply to this condition, making the collection of DNA samples discretionary and thus subject to the conditions…”

United States v. Daniel Lomas, III, 643 F. App'x 319 (5th Cir. 2016). · cites it 7× “See U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3(a), (c), (d). This special condition is also not contained in General Order No.”

United States v. Cynthia Montoya, 82 F.4th 640 (9th Cir. 2023). · cites it 4× “2006), we held that the “mandatory and standard conditions” of supervised release described in U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3 are “deemed to be implicit in an oral sentence imposing supervised release,” even if the district court does not orally mention those conditions at the sentencing.”

Show all 725 citing cases →

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(5) — 1 case

United States v. Chan, 208 F. App'x 13 (1st Cir. 2006).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(7) — 3 cases

United States v. Robert D. McKissic, 428 F.3d 719 (7th Cir. 2005). “U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3; see 18 U.S.C. §§ 3583 (d), 3553(a)(1), 3553(a)(2)(B-D).”

United States v. Alvin Smith, 459 F.3d 1276 (11th Cir. 2006).

United States v. McKissic, Robert D. (7th Cir. 2005).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(a) — 38 cases

United States v. Rosie Diggles, 957 F.3d 551 (5th Cir. 2020). “4 The Guidelines categories, see U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3, may retain significance in other contexts.”

United States v. Perazza-Mercado, 553 F.3d 65 (1st Cir. 2009). “See generally U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3(a). However, the court, in its discretion, also imposed a number of other conditions of supervised release, including all of the standard conditions of supervision described in U.”

United States v. Daniel Lomas, III, 643 F. App'x 319 (5th Cir. 2016). “See U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3(a), (c), (d). This special condition is also not contained in General Order No.”

United States v. Christopher Thomas, AKA Chris Reese, AKA Chris Thomas, 299 F.3d 150 (2d Cir. 2002).

United States v. Shawn Siegel, 753 F.3d 705 (7th Cir. 2014).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(a)(1) — 11 cases

United States v. Donald Reyes, Robert Jubic, 283 F.3d 446 (2d Cir. 2002).

United States v. Martinez-Torres, 795 F.3d 1233 (10th Cir. 2015).

United States v. Laulette Marie Love, 431 F.3d 477 (5th Cir. 2005).

United States v. Rodriguez-Melendez, 828 F.3d 35 (1st Cir. 2016).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(a)(2) — 1 case

United States v. Ferald Holland (5th Cir. 2020).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(a)(3) — 1 case

United States v. Ferguson (9th Cir. 2010).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(a)(4) — 23 cases

United States v. Melendez-Santana, 353 F.3d 93 (1st Cir. 2003). “U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3. The seven mandatory conditions include basic correctional provisions such as “the defendant shall not commit another federal, state or local offense,” id.”

United States v. Drapeau, 644 F.3d 646 (8th Cir. 2011).

United States v. Dwight Logins, 503 F. App'x 345 (6th Cir. 2012).

United States v. Cothran, 302 F.3d 279 (5th Cir. 2002).

United States v. Antonio D. Stephens, 424 F.3d 876 (9th Cir. 2005).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(a)(5) — 4 cases

United States v. Jeremy Strobel, 987 F.3d 743 (7th Cir. 2021).

United States v. Jerome Ford, 106 F.4th 607 (7th Cir. 2024).

United States v. Christopher Truett, 109 F.4th 996 (7th Cir. 2024).

United States v. Jerome Ford (7th Cir. 2024).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(a)(6) — 3 cases

United States v. Gallant, 306 F.3d 1181 (1st Cir. 2002).

United States v. Jeremy Strobel, 987 F.3d 743 (7th Cir. 2021).

United States v. Rosie Diggles, 928 F.3d 380 (5th Cir. 2019).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(a)(7) — 10 cases

Eric Wilson v. W. Flaherty, 689 F.3d 332 (4th Cir. 2012).

United States v. Cope, 527 F.3d 944 (9th Cir. 2008).

United States v. Mark I. Veal, A.K.A. Sharky, 322 F.3d 1275 (11th Cir. 2003).

United States v. Cope, 506 F.3d 908 (9th Cir. 2007).

United States v. Eric Morris, 391 F. App'x 149 (3rd Cir. 2010).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(a)(7)(B) — 1 case

United States v. Eric Morris, 391 F. App'x 149 (3rd Cir. 2010).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(a)(8) — 2 cases

United States v. Kimler, 335 F.3d 1132 (10th Cir. 2003). “USSG § 5D1.3(a)(8) (2002 ed.). Inexplicably, the briefs of both parties to this appeal proceed in large part on the assumption that the 2001 edition of the Guidelines apply to this condition, making the collection of DNA samples discretionary and thus subject to the conditions…”

United States v. Ferguson, 412 F. App'x 974 (9th Cir. 2011).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(a)(l) — 4 cases

United States v. Donald Reyes, Robert Jubic, 283 F.3d 446 (2d Cir. 2002).

United States v. Christopher Thomas, AKA Chris Reese, AKA Chris Thomas, 299 F.3d 150 (2d Cir. 2002).

United States v. Gordon Franklin, Jr., 435 F.3d 885 (8th Cir. 2006).

United States v. Rodríguez-Meléndez, 828 F.3d 35 (1st Cir. 2016).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(b) — 228 cases

United States v. Browder, 866 F.3d 504 (2d Cir. 2017).

United States v. Eric William Kingsley, 241 F.3d 828 (6th Cir. 2001).

United States v. Oliveras, 96 F.4th 298 (2d Cir. 2024).

United States v. David Zobel, 696 F.3d 558 (6th Cir. 2012).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(b)(1) — 19 cases

United States v. Farooq, 58 F.4th 687 (2d Cir. 2023).

United States v. Sims, 92 F.4th 115 (2d Cir. 2024). “The 2 policy statements are set forth in U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3 and include the Sentencing 3 Commission’s recommendations on certain conditions, such as the standard 4 conditions, and when they should be imposed.”

United States v. Prochner, 417 F.3d 54 (1st Cir. 2005). “Nothing contained in the statute underlying U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3 limits the condition of sex offender treatment just to individuals convicted of sex offenses.”

United States v. Thomas Alonzo Bolin, 976 F.3d 202 (2d Cir. 2020).

United States v. Parkins, 935 F.3d 63 (2d Cir. 2019).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(b)(1)(C) — 2 cases

United States v. Duane Arthur Myers, 426 F.3d 117 (2d Cir. 2005).

United States v. Donohue (2d Cir. 2018).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(b)(2) — 29 cases

United States v. Pabon, Jr., 819 F.3d 26 (1st Cir. 2016).

United States v. Eric William Kingsley, 241 F.3d 828 (6th Cir. 2001).

United States v. York, 357 F.3d 14 (1st Cir. 2004). “” See also U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3(b). In this case, the facts are drawn from the pre-sentence report, as amended to reflect York’s minor objections, and from the transcript of the sentencing hearing.”

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(b)(2)(G) — 1 case

United States v. Rene Bravo (11th Cir. 2026).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(b)(3) — 1 case

United States v. McAdam (2d Cir. 2026).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(b)(3)(G)(ii) — 1 case

United States v. Amaury Rodriguez (11th Cir. 2026).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(b)(l) — 11 cases

United States v. Dupes, 513 F.3d 338 (2d Cir. 2008).

United States v. Pabon, Jr., 819 F.3d 26 (1st Cir. 2016).

United States v. Kenneth Avery Brown, 402 F.3d 133 (2d Cir. 2005).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(b)(l)(A) — 2 cases

United States v. Martin R. Frankel, 443 F. App'x 603 (2d Cir. 2011).

United States v. Wiskus, 67 F. App'x 443 (9th Cir. 2003).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c) — 111 cases

United States v. Christopher Singletary, 984 F.3d 341 (4th Cir. 2021).

United States v. Cynthia Montoya, 82 F.4th 640 (9th Cir. 2023). “2006), we held that the “mandatory and standard conditions” of supervised release described in U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3 are “deemed to be implicit in an oral sentence imposing supervised release,” even if the district court does not orally mention those conditions at the sentencing.”

United States v. Robert D. McKissic, 428 F.3d 719 (7th Cir. 2005). “U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3; see 18 U.S.C. §§ 3583 (d), 3553(a)(1), 3553(a)(2)(B-D).”

United States v. Donte Island, 916 F.3d 249 (3rd Cir. 2019).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c)(1) — 15 cases

United States v. Izabela Gawron, 929 F.3d 473 (7th Cir. 2019).

United States v. Fernandez, 379 F.3d 270 (5th Cir. 2004).

United States v. Reynaldo Sanchez, 44 F.4th 1100 (8th Cir. 2022).

United States v. Keith Matthews, 54 F.4th 1 (D.C. Cir. 2022).

United States v. Izabela Gawron (7th Cir. 2019).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c)(10) — 7 cases

Bryan Range v. Attorney Gen. United States, 69 F.4th 96 (3rd Cir. 2023).

United States v. Donald Reyes, Robert Jubic, 283 F.3d 446 (2d Cir. 2002).

United States v. Paul Carson, 821 F.3d 849 (7th Cir. 2016).

United States v. Paul Carson (7th Cir. 2016).

United States v. Jeremy Fields (6th Cir. 2021).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c)(12) — 22 cases

United States v. Cabral, 926 F.3d 687 (10th Cir. 2019).

United States v. Mejia-Banegas, 32 F.4th 450 (5th Cir. 2022).

United States v. Hull, 893 F.3d 1221 (10th Cir. 2018).

United States v. Gerald Lynn Campbell, 77 F.4th 424 (6th Cir. 2023).

United States v. Pinon-Saldana, 44 F.4th 264 (5th Cir. 2022).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c)(13) — 6 cases

United States v. Reeves, 591 F.3d 77 (2d Cir. 2010).

United States v. MacMillen, 544 F.3d 71 (2d Cir. 2008).

United States v. Ali Amin, 85 F.4th 727 (4th Cir. 2023).

United States v. Reed, 421 F. App'x 113 (2d Cir. 2011).

United States v. Alberto Silva-Garcia (9th Cir. 2020).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c)(14) — 2 cases

United States v. Lewis, 498 F.3d 393 (6th Cir. 2007).

United States v. Lewis (6th Cir. 2007).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c)(2) — 4 cases

United States v. Dominick Truscello John Gammarano Salvatore Lombardi Barry Nichilo Gaetano Vastola Manny Garafolo Steven Long, Steven Crea, 168 F.3d 61 (2d Cir. 1999).

United States v. Zamudio (5th Cir. 2021).

United States v. Jeremy Saul (8th Cir. 2021).

United States v. Aubrey Heckstall (4th Cir. 2023).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c)(3) — 17 cases

United States v. John Lee, 888 F.3d 503 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “The Sentencing Guidelines separately identify the “mandatory,” “standard,” and “special” conditions for supervised release and refer generally to other conditions that may be imposed, subject to two limitations, U.”

United States v. Izabela Gawron, 929 F.3d 473 (7th Cir. 2019).

United States v. Dominick Truscello John Gammarano Salvatore Lombardi Barry Nichilo Gaetano Vastola Manny Garafolo Steven Long, Steven Crea, 168 F.3d 61 (2d Cir. 1999).

United States v. Mark Anthony Cooper, 171 F.3d 582 (8th Cir. 1999).

United States v. Cordell Collins, 939 F.3d 892 (7th Cir. 2019).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c)(4) — 7 cases

United States v. John Lakatos, 241 F.3d 690 (9th Cir. 2001).

United States v. Laulette Marie Love, 431 F.3d 477 (5th Cir. 2005).

United States v. Gill, 523 F.3d 107 (2d Cir. 2008).

United States v. Singh (2d Cir. 2018).

United States v. Love (5th Cir. 2005).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c)(5) — 2 cases

United States v. Adam Dyer, 685 F. App'x 329 (5th Cir. 2017).

United States v. McKissic, Robert D. (7th Cir. 2005).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c)(6) — 10 cases

United States v. John Cabello, 916 F.3d 543 (5th Cir. 2019).

United States v. Kontrol, 554 F.3d 1089 (6th Cir. 2009).

United States v. Spencer, 640 F.3d 513 (2d Cir. 2011).

United States v. Barajas, 331 F.3d 1141 (10th Cir. 2003).

United States v. Dominick Truscello John Gammarano Salvatore Lombardi Barry Nichilo Gaetano Vastola Manny Garafolo Steven Long, Steven Crea, 168 F.3d 61 (2d Cir. 1999).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c)(7) — 14 cases

United States v. Santario Boyd, 5 F.4th 550 (4th Cir. 2021).

United States v. Simons, 614 F.3d 475 (8th Cir. 2010).

United States v. Robert D. McKissic, 428 F.3d 719 (7th Cir. 2005). “U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3; see 18 U.S.C. §§ 3583 (d), 3553(a)(1), 3553(a)(2)(B-D).”

United States v. Dominick Truscello John Gammarano Salvatore Lombardi Barry Nichilo Gaetano Vastola Manny Garafolo Steven Long, Steven Crea, 168 F.3d 61 (2d Cir. 1999).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c)(8) — 7 cases

United States v. Robert Faber (6th Cir. 2017).

United States v. Soulemane Barry (3rd Cir. 2018).

United States v. Oscar Ballesteros (9th Cir. 2020).

United States v. Toby E. Bivins (11th Cir. 2023).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c)(9) — 1 case

United States v. Balderas, 358 F. App'x 575 (5th Cir. 2009).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c)(l) — 2 cases

United States v. Gregory Sanford, 806 F.3d 954 (7th Cir. 2015).

United States v. Sloley, 568 F. App'x 79 (2d Cir. 2014).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(c)(ll) — 1 case

United States v. Chalupa, 210 F. App'x 796 (10th Cir. 2006).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d) — 44 cases

United States v. Torres-Aguilar, 352 F.3d 934 (5th Cir. 2004).

United States v. James Taylor, 997 F.3d 1348 (11th Cir. 2021).

United States v. Nancy Jacques, 321 F.3d 255 (2d Cir. 2003).

United States v. Solomon Carpenter, 702 F.3d 882 (6th Cir. 2012).

United States v. Bigelow, 462 F.3d 378 (5th Cir. 2006).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(1) — 9 cases

United States v. Roger Rouland, 726 F.3d 728 (5th Cir. 2013).

United States v. Torres-Vasquez, 87 F. App'x 417 (5th Cir. 2004).

United States v. Rico J. Speed (7th Cir. 2016).

United States v. Sedillo (10th Cir. 2018).

United States v. Doroteo Zambrano-Ruiz (9th Cir. 2019).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(1)(5) — 1 case

United States v. Daniel Lomas, III, 643 F. App'x 319 (5th Cir. 2016). “See U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3(a), (c), (d). This special condition is also not contained in General Order No.”

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(1)(A) — 2 cases

United States v. Terry J. Martin (11th Cir. 2021).

United States v. Percy Parker (4th Cir. 2023).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(2) — 27 cases

United States v. Gloria Newell Nash, 438 F.3d 1302 (11th Cir. 2006).

United States v. Kenneth Avery Brown, 402 F.3d 133 (2d Cir. 2005).

United States v. Benjamin Hart, 829 F.3d 606 (8th Cir. 2016).

United States v. Ricky Sherwood, 850 F.3d 391 (8th Cir. 2017).

United States v. Gregory Charles Ervasti, United States of Am. v. Deniene \Dee\" Ervasti", 201 F.3d 1029 (8th Cir. 2000).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(3) — 24 cases

United States v. Lewis, 125 F.4th 69 (2d Cir. 2025).

United States v. Garcia, 522 F.3d 855 (9th Cir. 2008).

United States v. Kenneth Avery Brown, 402 F.3d 133 (2d Cir. 2005).

United States v. Sepulveda Contreras, 466 F.3d 166 (1st Cir. 2006).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(4) — 49 cases

United States v. Dwight Logins, 503 F. App'x 345 (6th Cir. 2012).

United States v. Roger Rouland, 726 F.3d 728 (5th Cir. 2013).

United States v. Chance Rearden, 349 F.3d 608 (9th Cir. 2003).

United States v. Cothran, 302 F.3d 279 (5th Cir. 2002).

United States v. Bigelow, 462 F.3d 378 (5th Cir. 2006).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(4)(A) — 1 case

United States v. Alvontre Griffin (5th Cir. 2019).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(5) — 35 cases

United States v. Daniel Lomas, III, 643 F. App'x 319 (5th Cir. 2016). “See U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3(a), (c), (d). This special condition is also not contained in General Order No.”

United States v. Maria Alvarez, 880 F.3d 236 (5th Cir. 2018).

United States v. Jereb, 882 F.3d 1325 (10th Cir. 2018).

United States v. Juan Jose Lopez, 258 F.3d 1053 (9th Cir. 2001).

United States v. Moran, 573 F.3d 1132 (11th Cir. 2009).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(6) — 1 case

United States v. Fernando Vasquez-Parrales, 457 F. App'x 390 (5th Cir. 2012).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(7) — 30 cases

United States v. Tyree Neal, Sr., 810 F.3d 512 (7th Cir. 2016).

United States v. Parrish Kappes, 782 F.3d 828 (7th Cir. 2015). “§§ 3563(a)-(b), 3583(d); U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3. Some of the discretionary conditions are called “standard,” U.”

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(7)(A) — 11 cases

United States v. Matthew Henry Weber, 451 F.3d 552 (9th Cir. 2006).

United States v. Calvin Windless, 719 F.3d 415 (5th Cir. 2013).

United States v. Metzener, 584 F.3d 928 (10th Cir. 2009).

United States v. Smith, 655 F.3d 839 (8th Cir. 2011).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(7)(B) — 17 cases

United States v. Jose Miguel Cordero, 7 F.4th 1058 (11th Cir. 2021).

United States v. Glen Sterling Carpenter, 803 F.3d 1224 (11th Cir. 2015).

United States v. William Trimble, Jr., 969 F.3d 853 (8th Cir. 2020).

United States v. Blaine Joyner Coglianese, 34 F.4th 1002 (11th Cir. 2022).

United States v. Fernando Fernandez, 776 F.3d 344 (5th Cir. 2015).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(7)(C) — 23 cases

United States v. Parrish Kappes, 782 F.3d 828 (7th Cir. 2015). “§§ 3563(a)-(b), 3583(d); U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3. Some of the discretionary conditions are called “standard,” U.”

United States v. Oliveras, 96 F.4th 298 (2d Cir. 2024).

United States v. John Booker, Jr., 994 F.3d 591 (6th Cir. 2021).

United States v. Anthony Morgan, 987 F.3d 627 (7th Cir. 2021).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(7)(b) — 1 case

United States v. Alexis Caballero (11th Cir. 2018).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(l) — 12 cases

United States v. Torres-Aguilar, 352 F.3d 934 (5th Cir. 2004).

United States v. Bigelow, 462 F.3d 378 (5th Cir. 2006).

Osuna-Gutierrez v. Johnson, 838 F.3d 1030 (10th Cir. 2016).

United States v. Speed, 811 F.3d 854 (7th Cir. 2016).

United States v. James H. Gallaher, Jr., 275 F.3d 784 (9th Cir. 2001).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(d)(l)(5) — 1 case

United States v. Daniel Lomas, III, 643 F. App'x 319 (5th Cir. 2016). “See U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3(a), (c), (d). This special condition is also not contained in General Order No.”

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(e) — 7 cases

United States v. Parrish Kappes, 782 F.3d 828 (7th Cir. 2015). “§§ 3563(a)-(b), 3583(d); U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3. Some of the discretionary conditions are called “standard,” U.”

United States v. Edward Bahe, 201 F.3d 1124 (9th Cir. 2000).

United States v. Tim Collins, 684 F.3d 873 (9th Cir. 2012).

United States v. Larry James Ridgeway, 319 F.3d 1313 (11th Cir. 2003).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(e)(1) — 5 cases

United States v. Huffman, 146 F. App'x 939 (10th Cir. 2005).

United States v. Keenyn Hickman (8th Cir. 2024).

United States v. Hill (2d Cir. 2024).

United States v. Darnell Norton (8th Cir. 2024).

United States v. Matta (2d Cir. 2015).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(e)(1)(note) — 1 case

United States v. Head, Jamile M. (7th Cir. 2009).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(e)(13) — 1 case

United States v. Reed, 421 F. App'x 113 (2d Cir. 2011).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(e)(2) — 11 cases

United States v. Kravchuk, 335 F.3d 1147 (10th Cir. 2003).

United States v. T.M., 330 F.3d 1235 (9th Cir. 2003).

United States v. Blackwell, 651 F. App'x 8 (2d Cir. 2016).

United States v. Brian Floss, 42 F.4th 854 (8th Cir. 2022).

United States v. Gregory Polydore, 493 F. App'x 496 (5th Cir. 2012).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(e)(3) — 2 cases

United States v. Sidney Greene, 707 F. App'x 445 (9th Cir. 2017).

United States v. David Han, 551 F. App'x 422 (9th Cir. 2014).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(e)(4) — 4 cases

United States v. Walbert Farmer, 755 F.3d 849 (7th Cir. 2014).

United States v. The-Nimrod Sterling, 959 F.3d 855 (8th Cir. 2020).

United States v. Turner, 88 F. App'x 307 (10th Cir. 2004).

United States v. Torres, 281 F. App'x 394 (5th Cir. 2008).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(e)(5) — 5 cases

United States v. David Bell, 915 F.3d 574 (8th Cir. 2019).

United States v. Quinones-Otero, 869 F.3d 49 (1st Cir. 2017).

United States v. Murphy, 685 F. App'x 643 (10th Cir. 2017).

United States v. Michael Whitfield, 464 F. App'x 525 (6th Cir. 2012).

United States v. Robert Ellis (4th Cir. 2024).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(e)(8) — 1 case

United States v. Michael Milay, 711 F. App'x 815 (9th Cir. 2017).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(e)(9) — 1 case

United States v. Love, 593 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2010).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(e)(S) — 1 case

United States v. Cliffton S. Mormon, 602 F. App'x 506 (11th Cir. 2015).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(e)(l) — 7 cases

United States v. Matta, 777 F.3d 116 (2d Cir. 2015).

United States v. Edward Bahe, 201 F.3d 1124 (9th Cir. 2000).

United States v. Huffman, 146 F. App'x 939 (10th Cir. 2005).

United States v. Mills, 186 F. Supp. 2d 965 (E.D. Wis. 2002).

Loeffler v. Menifee, 326 F. Supp. 2d 454 (S.D.N.Y. 2004).

— U.S.S.G. §5D1.3(e)(l)(note) — 1 case

United States v. Head, 552 F.3d 640 (7th Cir. 2009).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.