New Jersey & New York Legal Defense
Federal Criminal Sentences Increasingly Vary by Judge Providing Innovative Solutions & Obtaining Optimal Results
Legal

Federal Criminal Sentences Increasingly Vary by Judge

The disparity in criminal sentences meted out by federal judges is increasing, according to a new report issued by the U.S. Sentencing Commission. The Report, entitled Intra-City Differences in Federal Sentencing Practices: Federal District Judges in 30 Cities, 2005–2017, studies disparities according to sentencing judge since the Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines are advisory rather than mandatory in United States v. Booker.

The Commission selected 30 cities to represent eleven of the twelve appellate circuits, as well as the major geographical regions.  As a result of the Commission’s selection criteria, no New Jersey city was studied.  However, Philadelphia (Eastern District of Pennsylvania) and Manhattan (Southern District of New York) feature in the Report.

After excluding certain categories of cases from its analysis — such as those in which a life sentence was mandatory, or where the court granted downward departure due to the defendant’s cooperation — the Commission analyzed 143,589 cases.  The breakdown of types of offenses are as follows: 31.0% for drugs (USSG § 2D1.1); 14.2% for unlawful entry/remaining (§2L1.2); 13.1% for theft, embezzlement, and fraud (§2B1.1); 12.7% for firearms (§2K2.1); and 29.0% for other offenses.

The Commission measured the difference between the low end of the Guideline range and the ultimate sentence in each case, expressed as a percentage of the Guideline minimum. For example, if the Guideline minimum was 60 months and the sentence was 72 months, the result was (12/60 = ) +20%. Conversely, if the minimum was 60 months and the sentence was 36 months, the result was (24/60 =) –40%. The Commission chose to measure differences from the bottom of the Guideline range based on two remarkable preliminary findings:

  • Most (58.4% of) sentences imposed within the Guideline range are precisely at the Guideline minimum.
  • Courts depart or vary downward from the Guideline range 21 times more frequently than upward.

Based on these preliminary findings, the Report commented that the Guideline minimum exerts a “gravitational pull” on sentences.

Currently, the courts in the S.D.N.Y. impose sentences that average 36.3% below the Guideline minimum, which is the largest downward deviance from the minimums among all 30 cities studied.  Philadelphia is 18.4% below the Guideline minimum, due in large part to a single sentencing judge who was a statistical “flyer,” who sentences an average 40% below the minimum.

The Report concludes that “[i]n most cities, the length of a defendant’s sentence increasingly depends on which judge in the courthouse is assigned to his or her case.”  The important unstated conclusion is that as judges increasingly exercise their discretion to vary from the advisory sentencing guidelines, the more important it is for defendants to have the best representation possible.  If you or a loved one are facing federal prosecution or even investigation, immediately engage the services of an experienced federal criminal defense firm with a track record of positive results.

Categories

What Makes Us Different?

  • Proactive Representation

    We are dedicated to protecting your rights and fighting for your freedom.

  • Innovative Approach

    We provide innovative, personalized solutions to best fit your needs.

  • Free Consultation

    We believe nobody should have to pay when looking to hire an attorney.

  • Premier Boutique Law Firm

    We handle the most serious and complex white-collar, state and federal crimes.

Practicing in New Jersey & New York for Over 35 Years

Real People, Real Stories

  • “Jack represented me in a criminal case brought by the State of New Jersey, Division of Justice, Corruption bureau. The OAG spent five years preparing their case, so when they declared my employer and ...”

    - Paul
  • “Jack Arseneault was a beacon of hope to my family and I at a time when my options appeared limited back in 2011. I pretty much would of been behind bars without a doubt if it wasn’t for him. Not only ...”

    - Dominique
  • “My brother was facing criminal charges which were a result of identity theft. My friend suggests me to contact Arseneault & Fassett, LLP. I had discussed my brother cases with their professional team ...”

    - Mark J.
  • “My experience with Arseneault & Fassett, LLP was exceptional: they were knowledgeable and professional. Their staff is experienced and give you the best solution for your problem. We were very ...”

    - Charlize J.
  • “I hired Jack to defend me in a criminal case brought against me by the Federal Government. Jack worked tirelessly for me for over four years which resulted in a positive outcome that I believe would ...”

    - Frank
/

Results That Matter

  • 17-Count State Criminal Indictment Outright Dismissal
  • Billing Fraud Acquittal Of All Charges
  • Federal Anti-Trust Civil Complaint Settled
  • Federal Criminal Charges Immunity
  • Federal Criminal Indictment Dismissed
  • Federal Structuring Charges One-Year License Suspension
  • Fraud Dismissed
  • Fraud Offenses Six-Month Halfway House
  • Fraud Offenses Noncustodial Probationary Sentence and $90,000
  • Fraudulent Bill Submittal Three-Month License Suspension
/

Build A Strong Defense Today

Request a Free Evaluation with Our Powerhouse Team
  • Please enter your first name.
  • Please enter your last name.
  • Please enter your phone number.
    This isn't a valid phone number.
  • Please enter your email address.
    This isn't a valid email address.
  • Please make a selection.
  • Please enter a message.