United States v. Hardaway – The Eleventh Circuit Confirms that Sensory-Based Circumstantial Evidence Alone Can Establish Controlled-Substance Possession in Supervised-Release Revocation Proceedings

1. Introduction

United States v. Pierre Cortez Hardaway, No. 23-13605 (11th Cir. June 27, 2025), presented the Court of Appeals with the question whether a district court abused its discretion when it revoked a defendant’s supervised release and imposed the 24-month statutory maximum sentence on the ground that he possessed marijuana and drug paraphernalia, even though laboratory confirmation of the substance’s THC content was not yet available.

Mr. Hardaway, previously convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm, had begun a three-year term of supervised release in April 2021. Less than two years later, a probation officer petitioned for revocation after a local police officer discovered 5.2 ounces of a green leafy substance and a digital scale inside Hardaway’s truck following an altercation at an apartment complex. The key issues before the Eleventh Circuit were:

• Whether, in the revocation context, the government must produce chemical test results to prove the substance was marijuana; and
• Whether a 24-month custodial sentence—at the top of the advisory guideline range and the statutory maximum—was substantively and procedurally reasonable.

2. Summary of the Judgment

In a per curiam opinion, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision. The panel held:

• Possession Proven by a Preponderance: Circumstantial evidence based on Officer Simpson’s training, sensory observations (sight and smell), presence of a digital scale, Hardaway’s dominion over the truck, and his prior admitted drug use was sufficient—without laboratory testing—to establish that the substance was marijuana and that Hardaway constructively possessed it.
• Sentence Was Reasonable: Because Hardaway’s conduct constituted a Grade B violation and the resulting guideline range was 21–27 months (U.S.S.G. §7B1.4), the 24-month sentence fell within both the advisory range and the statutory maximum (18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3)) and was therefore not an abuse of discretion.

3. Analysis

3.1 Precedents Cited and Their Influence

• United States v. Harrell, 737 F.2d 971 (11th Cir. 1984): Established that lay testimony based on prior familiarity with narcotics can identify a controlled substance. The Hardaway court relied heavily on this principle to credit Officer Simpson’s sensory identification.
• United States v. Zielie, 734 F.2d 1447 (11th Cir. 1984) & United States v. Barrett, 954 F.2d 674 (11th Cir. 1992): Confirmed that chemical analysis is not indispensable to proving drug identity. These cases undercut Hardaway’s argument that a field officer cannot reliably distinguish hemp from marijuana.
• United States v. Montes-Cardenas, 746 F.2d 771 (11th Cir. 1984): Defined constructive possession through ownership, dominion, or control of the location where contraband is found. The panel applied this framework to the truck registered to and routinely driven by Hardaway.
• United States v. Williams, 865 F.3d 1328 (11th Cir. 2017): Reaffirmed that the fact-finder need not exclude every hypothesis of innocence. The court cited Williams when dismissing Hardaway’s suggestion that his ex-girlfriend could have planted the drugs.
• United States v. Sweeting, 437 F.3d 1105 (11th Cir. 2006) & United States v. Thompson, 976 F.2d 1380 (11th Cir. 1992): Upheld statutory-maximum sentences for supervised-release violations when justified by the §3553(a) factors. The panel analogized Hardaway’s case to Sweeting.
• Standard-of-review cases (Copeland, Almand, Rothenberg, Velasquez) provided the deferential abuse-of-discretion and clear-error benchmarks guiding appellate scrutiny.

3.2 Legal Reasoning

The decision turns on two doctrinal pillars:

1. Burden and Standard of Proof in Revocation Hearings.
   Unlike a criminal trial, revocation only requires proof by a preponderance of the evidence (18 U.S.C. §3583(e)(3)). The court stressed that the relaxed evidentiary burden allows reliance on credible circumstantial indicators without forensic confirmation.
2. Sensory and Circumstantial Identification of Drugs.
   Citing Harrell and related precedents, the panel reiterated that (i) an experienced officer’s sensory observations, (ii) the amount of substance (well above Georgia’s one-ounce felony threshold), (iii) the presence of a drug scale, (iv) Hardaway’s dominion and control over the vehicle, and (v) his prior marijuana admissions collectively outweighed Hardaway’s speculative innocence narrative.

3.3 Potential Impact

The ruling’s ramifications extend beyond the immediate parties:

• Lower Evidentiary Threshold in Revocations: District courts within the Eleventh Circuit now have clear authority to revoke supervised release based solely on credible sensory identification of marijuana—even amid the legal overlap with hemp—provided the totality of circumstances is persuasive.
• Streamlined Proceedings: Probation officers and prosecutors can proceed without waiting for slow laboratory results, accelerating resolution of revocation petitions and reducing pre-hearing detention time.
• Defense Strategy Shift: Defendants may focus more on challenging officer credibility and chain-of-custody facts rather than insisting on chemical tests.
• Clarification of Reasonableness Review: The case reinforces that a sentence at the statutory cap is presumptively reasonable when it also sits within the advisory Chapter 7 guideline band.
• Hemp–Marijuana Distinction: Although the 2018 Farm Bill legalized hemp, Hardaway underscores that law enforcement testimony remains sufficient to distinguish illicit marijuana from lawful hemp for revocation purposes—a point likely to influence future litigation involving smokable hemp products.

4. Complex Concepts Simplified

Supervised Release

A period of community supervision following imprisonment. Violation can lead to re-imprisonment.

Revocation Hearing

A summary proceeding, civil in nature, where the judge determines whether conditions of supervised release were breached.

Preponderance of the Evidence

The lowest standard of proof in U.S. law—meaning “more likely than not.”

Constructive Possession

Having dominion or control over an item or the place where it is located, even if not physically holding it.

Grade B Violation

Under U.S.S.G. §7B1.1, conduct constituting any offense punishable by over one year of imprisonment.

Statutory Maximum (18 U.S.C. §3583(e)(3))

The highest prison term Congress allows upon revocation—24 months in Hardaway’s underlying Class C felony.

Hemp vs. Marijuana

Hemp is federally legal if THC content ≤ 0.3%. Marijuana remains Schedule I. Field officers typically rely on sensory cues; definitive differentiation requires lab testing, but Hardaway accepts sensory identification for revocation.

5. Conclusion

United States v. Hardaway cements a pragmatic evidentiary rule within the Eleventh Circuit: an experienced officer’s sensory identification, corroborated by contextual facts, can support a finding of controlled-substance possession in supervised-release revocations. By validating a 24-month sentence at the apex of the guideline range, the court also reaffirms that statutory-maximum terms are appropriate when justified by the § 3553(a) factors and the defendant’s criminal history. The decision streamlines revocation practice, influences defense tactics, and provides clarity on the hemp–marijuana debate in the revocation arena.