Federal Environmental Offense Sentences in the Eastern District of Texas, FY2016–2025
Probation only was the most common result for environmental offenses in the Eastern District of Texas: 8 of 17 people (47%) received it, against 7 (41%) who received a prison term. The 17 were sentenced in fiscal years 2016 to 2024. For environmental offenses in all 94 federal districts, 28% were se
· Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 6 min read
Trends › Federal Prosecution Analysis › Federal Sentences in the Eastern District of Texas, FY2016–2 › Environmental Offense: Eastern District of Texas
In brief: Probation only was the most common result for environmental offenses in the Eastern District of Texas: 8 of 17 people (47%) received it, against 7 (41%) who received a prison term. The 17 were sentenced in fiscal years 2016 to 2024. For environmental offenses in all 94 federal districts, 28% were sent to prison.
This post uses the U.S. Sentencing Commission's records of 17 people sentenced in federal court in fiscal years 2016 to 2025. Acquittals and dismissals come from a second source, the Federal Judicial Center's records of 753,808 federal defendants whose cases ended in fiscal years 2016 to 2025. It is part of the Federal Prosecution Analysis series, which builds on Military Moves Toward Sentencing Guidelines to Mirror the Federal System. How the numbers were built: How the Federal Comparison Data Was Built.
Probation More Often Than Prison
8 of the 17 people received probation with no prison or other confinement. 7 were sent to prison. The share sent to prison was 41% in this district and 28% in all 94 districts, where the Commission counted 1,638 people for this offense type.
The middle prison term in this district was 12 months. The shortest quarter received 10.5 months or less, and the longest quarter received 14 months or more. The median for all districts was 5 months. Prison terms are those imposed at sentencing.
What the Cases Were About
The records name one primary guideline per person. The largest group, 9 people, fell under §2Q2.1 (Offenses Involving Fish, Wildlife, and Plants). Pollution and chemical handling accounted for the rest: 2 people under §2Q1.2 (Mishandling of Hazardous or Toxic Substances or Pesticides) and 2 under §2Q1.3 (Mishandling of Other Environmental Pollutants).
"Environmental" is a Commission label for a group of guidelines. It is not a single statute.
How Sentences Related to the Guideline Range
Sentences matched the calculated range more often here than in the country as a whole. Of 16 people with the information, 11 (69%) were sentenced within the range. In all districts the figure was 50%. For all offenses in this district it was 64%.
Below-range sentences numbered 5. 2 of them (13%) were at the government's request and 3 (19%) were not. None was above the range. No mandatory minimum applied to anyone in the group.
Pleas, Money, and Supervision
Guilty pleas accounted for 16 of 17 people (94%), and 1 person was convicted at trial. Across all districts the plea rate was 98%. In this district, 94% of pleas had a written agreement.
Fines were ordered for 6 people (35%), and so was restitution. 6 people (35%) were placed on supervised release after prison, with a median term of 30 months.
Where This Offense Sits in the District's Work
The district sentenced 7,998 people over fiscal years 2016 to 2025, and its median prison term across all offenses was 64.5 months. Environmental cases are less than 1% of that total, and their median is much shorter.
In the lowest criminal history category were 63% of the group, and 6% were in the highest. Court-martial records have no criminal history field.
Counts by Fiscal Year
The district had 11 people in fiscal years 2016 to 2019 and 6 in fiscal years 2020 to 2025. No year has more than 5 people, and several medians are n/a. These counts are too small to show a trend.
| Fiscal year | People sentenced | Median prison | Pleaded guilty |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | 2 | 12 months | 1 of 2 |
| 2017 | 2 | n/a | 2 of 2 |
| 2018 | 5 | 16 months | 5 of 5 |
| 2019 | 2 | n/a | 2 of 2 |
| 2020 | 1 | n/a | 1 of 1 |
| 2021 | 2 | 0 months | 2 of 2 |
| 2023 | 2 | 12 months | 2 of 2 |
| 2024 | 1 | 12 months | 1 of 1 |
What Is Missing
People who were acquitted or whose cases were dismissed are not in the Commission's data. Nor does it explain why a judge chose probation or prison, or what harm a case involved.
How We Counted
Everyone sentenced in federal court in the Eastern District of Texas (U.S. Sentencing Commission district label "Texas East") in fiscal years 2016 to 2025 whose offense type was "Environmental" (17). Offense types are the Commission's OFFGUIDE categories.
Federal fiscal years run from October 1 to September 30. No person, judge, or lawyer is identified in any of these records.
What to Keep in Mind
No parole in federal prison; credit for good conduct. Federal prison has no parole for crimes committed on or after November 1, 1987. A federal prisoner can earn up to 54 days of good conduct credit for each year of the sentence the judge imposed, which is about 15%. Some federal prisoners can also earn First Step Act time credits, but many offenses make a person ineligible. The numbers in this post are the sentences judges imposed, not the time people actually served.
Federal supervised release. Most federal prison sentences are followed by a term of supervised release that the judge sets as part of the sentence. A person who violates it can be sent back to prison. A court-martial cannot sentence anyone to supervision after release. Military parole and mandatory supervised release are decided later by a board, not by the judge at trial.
Who decides the sentence, and under what rules. Federal judges sentence every federal case. They must calculate the Sentencing Guidelines range, which is advisory, and must impose any mandatory minimum the statute requires unless an exception applies. In courts-martial, the accused could choose sentencing by members until the rules changed. For cases in which every guilty finding is for an offense committed after December 27, 2023, a military judge sentences alone, within sentencing parameters. Courts-martial tried in 2024 and later include both old-rule and new-rule cases, and the data cannot tell them apart.
Time periods. Federal numbers are by federal fiscal year (October 1 to September 30), based on the sentencing date. The military numbers are by trial date. Neither source has the date of the offense, so a change in law shows up in either data set gradually.
How life sentences and "time served" are counted. In the federal numbers, a life sentence is counted as 470 months, and any other sentence longer than 470 months is counted as just under 470 months. A sentence of "time served" is counted as one day (0.03 months). Averages are affected by these rules; medians much less.
Related Analysis
- Military Moves Toward Sentencing Guidelines to Mirror the Federal System (the background article)
- Federal Prosecution Analysis (all federal posts)
- How the Federal Comparison Data Was Built (sources and method)
- Federal Sentences in the Eastern District of Texas, FY2016–2025 (overview)
- Federal Drug Trafficking Sentences in the Eastern District of Texas, FY2016–2025 (same district, other offense type)
- Federal Firearms Sentences in the Eastern District of Texas, FY2016–2025 (same district, other offense type)
- Federal Fraud, Theft, and Embezzlement Sentences in the Eastern District of Texas, FY2016–2025 (same district, other offense type)
- Federal Immigration Offense Sentences in the Eastern District of Texas, FY2016–2025 (same district, other offense type)
- U.S. Sentencing Commission, Individual Offender Datafiles (source)
- Federal Judicial Center, Integrated Database (criminal defendants) (source)
About the author. Jocelyn C. Stewart is a retired Army JAG with more than 24 years of trying courts-martial and more than 200 jury trials. She hosts Where All The Bodies Are Buried and runs the Law Office of Jocelyn C. Stewart. This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.