United States v. Thomas

In United States v. Thomas, No. 24-30159 (5th Cir. Dec. 4, 2024) (unpublished), the Fifth Circuit vacated the defendant’s sentence and remanded his case for resentencing because the district court did not give the defendant or his counsel the opportunity to speak before it imposed the sentence.

Thomas was brought before the district court based on alleged violations of his conditions of supervised release. At the revocation hearing, Thomas’s counsel disputed the allegations. The district court listened to both parties’ arguments, decided Thomas had violated his conditions of release, and imposed a 24-month prison sentence. At no point did the court allow Thomas to allocute—the court did not even address Thomas directly—and it did not allow his counsel to speak to the issue of what sentence would be appropriate.

On appeal, the Fifth Circuit applied plain-error review because neither Thomas nor his counsel had objected to being denied the right to speak. But even under that demanding standard, the court found reversible error. Notably, Thomas argued that he would have “provided mitigating information about the incident [that led to his revocation] and the progress he has made while on supervised release.” The court concluded that those details might lead the district court to reconsider its sentence, so it remanded the case for resentencing.