Case Explained: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. STEPHEN VOSILLA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-29 The Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court’s revocation of Stephen Vosilla’s supervised release and its imposition of an eighteen-month prison sentence followed by a new twenty-five-year term of supervised release. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Vosilla violated three conditions of his release: committing a new criminal offense by failing to report email addresses as required by Tennessee’s sex-offender-registration laws, violating the requirement to comply with those registration laws, and possessing and using internet-capable gaming consoles without probation officer approval. In reaching this decision, the court applied the standard of review for supervised release revocations, examining legal conclusions de novo, factual findings for clear error, and the ultimate revocation decision for an abuse of discretion under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3). The court determined that ample evidence supported the finding of violations, including Vosilla’s own admissions regarding unregistered email accounts and his possession of prohibited devices found in his residence. Regarding Vosilla’s argument that the district court improperly relied on inadmissible hearsay from a Sony tip regarding online chats with a minor, the court ruled that this evidence was unnecessary to sustain the revocation because independent evidence—specifically the physical seizure of the consoles and Vosilla’s admission of unauthorized possession—was sufficient to prove the violation. Furthermore, the court rejected Vosilla’s procedural reasonableness challenge to his sentence, concluding that the district court properly considered the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), including Vosilla’s history of exploiting minors online and the need to protect the public from future harm. The practical consequence of this ruling is that Vosilla’s supervised release remains revoked, and he must serve the eighteen-month prison term ordered by the district court before beginning a new twenty-five-year period of supervised release under the same conditions. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.