§7B1.5. No Credit for Time on Probation (Policy Statement)
Upon revocation of probation, no credit shall be given (toward any sentence of imprisonment imposed) for any portion of the term of probation served prior to revocation.
Commentary
Background: This section provides that time served on probation is not to be credited in the determination of any term of imprisonment imposed upon revocation. Other aspects of the defendant's conduct, such as compliance with probation conditions and adjustment while on probation, appropriately may be considered by the court in the determination of the sentence to be imposed within the applicable revocation range.
Historical Note: Effective November 1, 1990 (amendment 362). Amended effective November 1, 2025 (amendment 835).
PART C — VIOLATIONS OF SUPERVISED RELEASE
Introductory Commentary
At the time of original sentencing, the court may—and in some cases, must—impose a term of supervised release to follow the sentence of imprisonment. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(a). During that term, the court may receive allegations that the defendant has violated a condition of supervision. In responding to such allegations, addressing a violation found during revocation proceedings, and imposing a sentence upon revocation, the court should conduct the same kind of individualized assessment used "in determining whether to include a term of supervised release, and, if a term of supervised release is to be included, in determining the length of the term and the conditions of supervised release." See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(c), (e); Application Note 1 to §5D1.1 (Imposition of a Term of Supervised Release).
If the court finds that the defendant violated a condition of supervised release, it may continue the defendant on supervised release under existing conditions, modify the conditions, extend the term, or revoke supervised release and impose a term of imprisonment. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3). The court also has authority to terminate a term of supervised release and discharge the defendant at any time after the expiration of one year of supervised release if it is satisfied that such action is warranted by the conduct of the defendant and the interest of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1).
Because supervised release is intended to promote rehabilitation and ease the defendant’s transition back into the community, the Commission encourages courts—where possible—to consider a wide array of options to respond to non-compliant behavior and violations of the conditions of supervised release. These interim steps before revocation are intended to allow courts to address the defendant’s failure to comply with court-imposed conditions and to better address the needs of the defendant while also maintaining public safety. If revocation is mandated by statute or the court otherwise determines revocation to be appropriate, the sentence imposed upon revocation should be tailored to address the failure to abide by the conditions of the court-ordered supervision; imposition of an appropriate punishment for new criminal conduct is not the primary goal of a revocation sentence. The determination of the appropriate sentence on any new criminal conviction that is also a basis of the violation should be a separate determination for the court having jurisdiction over such conviction.
Historical Note: Effective November 1, 2025 (amendment 835).
Notes of Decisions
United States v. Lorenzo Turner, 21 F.4th 862 (D.C. Cir. 2022).
“4; see also § 7B1.3 (“Upon a finding of a Grade A or B violation, the court shall revoke probation or supervised release.”
United States v. Mark A. Horek, 137 F.3d 1226 (10th Cir. 1998).
“Relying on U.S.S.G. § 7B1.5(a) (policy statement), this court noted that “[w]hen probation is revoked, the district court is not permitted to give the defendant credit for time spent on probation in calculating the length of the new sentence imposed.”
United States v. Tony Gladney (7th Cir. 2010).
“See U.S.S.G. § 7B1.5(b) (“Upon revocation of supervised release, no credit shall be given (toward any term of imprisonment ordered) for time previously served on post‐release supervision.”
United States v. Raymon Ortega, 577 F. App'x 619 (8th Cir. 2014).
“See U.S.S.G. § 7B1.5(b) (upon revocation of supervised release, no credit is given toward imprisonment ordered for time previously served on post-release supervision).”
United States v. Shawn A. Hungate, 138 F. App'x 853 (8th Cir. 2005).
“The defendant argues that the 18 month sentence imposed would exceed the statutory maximum of 24 months if his 30 days in home detention for testing positive for cocaine and his 6 months in a residential facility for testing positive for methamphetamine were added to it. Credit…”
United States v. Horek (10th Cir. 1998).
“The court therefore upheld the defendant’s sentence because “[w]hen the time spent on probation [was] disregarded, [the defendant’s] sentence [was] well within the authorized limits.”
United States v. Card (4th Cir. 1996).
“USSG§ 7B1.5, p.s. Thus, the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Card within the guideline range in light of the cumulative effect of his supervised release violations.”
United States v. Card (4th Cir. 1998).
“See U.S.S.G. § 7B1.5, p.s. Thus, because Card was subject to a statutory maximum sentence of two years and he had previously served a total of twelve months incarceration, the district court did not abuse its discretion by ordering Card to serve the remaining twelve months.”
United States v. Nancy Ruth Iversen (8th Cir. 1996).
“U.S.S.G. § 7B1.5(a), p.s. ("Upon revocation of probation, no credit shall be given (toward any sentence of imprisonment imposed) for any portion of the term of probation served prior to revocation.”
— U.S.S.G. §7B1.5(a) — 4 cases
United States v. Mark A. Horek, 137 F.3d 1226 (10th Cir. 1998).
“Relying on U.S.S.G. § 7B1.5(a) (policy statement), this court noted that “[w]hen probation is revoked, the district court is not permitted to give the defendant credit for time spent on probation in calculating the length of the new sentence imposed.”
United States v. Horek (10th Cir. 1998).
“The court therefore upheld the defendant’s sentence because “[w]hen the time spent on probation [was] disregarded, [the defendant’s] sentence [was] well within the authorized limits.”
United States v. Nancy Ruth Iversen (8th Cir. 1996).
“U.S.S.G. § 7B1.5(a), p.s. ("Upon revocation of probation, no credit shall be given (toward any sentence of imprisonment imposed) for any portion of the term of probation served prior to revocation.”
— U.S.S.G. §7B1.5(b) — 4 cases
United States v. Lorenzo Turner, 21 F.4th 862 (D.C. Cir. 2022).
“4; see also § 7B1.3 (“Upon a finding of a Grade A or B violation, the court shall revoke probation or supervised release.”
United States v. Tony Gladney (7th Cir. 2010).
“See U.S.S.G. § 7B1.5(b) (“Upon revocation of supervised release, no credit shall be given (toward any term of imprisonment ordered) for time previously served on post‐release supervision.”
United States v. Raymon Ortega, 577 F. App'x 619 (8th Cir. 2014).
“See U.S.S.G. § 7B1.5(b) (upon revocation of supervised release, no credit is given toward imprisonment ordered for time previously served on post-release supervision).”
United States v. Shawn A. Hungate, 138 F. App'x 853 (8th Cir. 2005).
“The defendant argues that the 18 month sentence imposed would exceed the statutory maximum of 24 months if his 30 days in home detention for testing positive for cocaine and his 6 months in a residential facility for testing positive for methamphetamine were added to it. Credit…”
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.