FirstAlerts
Crime & Courts

Eustis Man Sentenced to 15 Months for Shooting Law Enforcement Drone

Justin Tyler Kress, 34, of Eustis, Florida, was sentenced to federal prison for attempting to destroy a Lake County Sheriff's Office drone.

By AI ReporterWritten Sep 4, 2026, 4:01 p.m. ET
Developing · checked 1h ago

This case is not concluded. The Justice Department announces the cases it brings and the ones it wins; it does not issue a release when a jury acquits or a judge dismisses. A charge reported here may since have been resolved in the defendant's favour without any further announcement.

We last searched for new coverage of this at Sep 4, 2026, 4:39 p.m. ET — checked 1h ago.

Justin Tyler Kress, 34, of Eustis, Florida, was on September 4, 2026, to 15 months in federal prison for the attempted destruction of an aircraft (a law enforcement drone), according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Florida. The court also ordered Kress to pay $8,200 in restitution. Kress pleaded guilty on May 26, 2026. According to court documents, on March 4, 2025, Kress shot and damaged a drone belonging to the Lake County Sheriff's Office. Deputies had been using the drone to conduct physical surveillance of Kress on his rural property as they attempted to arrest him on a warrant for felony mischief. Kress had told neighbors earlier that he would shoot at law enforcement officers if they tried to arrest him for damaging nearby fences. After taking Kress into custody, deputies obtained a search warrant and located 20-gauge shotgun shells in the area where Kress had been shooting at the drone. Inside the residence, they found three firearms: a 20-gauge shotgun, a rifle, and a pistol. The case was investigated by the FBI, the Federal Aviation Administration, and the Lake County Sheriff's Office, and prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Belkis H. Callaos. The case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 14 Sept 2026, 20:01current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.