Federal Sentencing Guidelines

Kalash

Kalash

Bluelighter
Joined
Apr 8, 2007
Messages
3,295
Location
California
Because you never know when they'll come in handy...
(It took me 3 weeks to find them online...)

http://www.miami-criminal-lawyer.net/federal-sentencing-guidelines/2006guid/tabcon06_1.html

Chapter 2, part D is the drug one...
Companion reading;
Federal Sentencing Table
http://www.ussc.gov/1998guid/Sentable.htm



Points of interest... (For MDMA/ecstasy users...)

4 pills of ecstasy = 1 pound of pot

3200 pills - 5600 pills = 400-700kg of pot (881-1543 pounds)

Offense level 28 (where those pills or pot will put you...) is one offense level less than voluntary manslaughter. (29; 87-108 months)

It is one offense level higher than Assault with intent to murder (if the successful murder would not have qualified as first degree...) (27; 70-87 months)

It is 2 offense levels HIGHER than completing a financial transaction with a country that supports international terrorism OR the act was done evading national security controls regarding WMD's, nuclear weapons, chemical or biological weapons or materials. (26; 63-78 months)


It is equal to the following; (28; 78-97 months)

Drugging and having sex with a minor (under the age of 12) with the aggravating circumstances of being in charge of the minor's care as well as using a computer to persuade, coerce, (or other term to convince unknowingly or unwillingly...) the minor to agree to the act.

Larceny of greater than $20,000,000

Armed robbery of more than $250,000.

Armed robbery with firearm discharge of more than $10,000.



Basically...
For the money... either start selling pot, find a company to siphon money out of, or get a gun and start robbing banks.

Heck...
It's worse than selling nuclear bombs to Afghanistan...
I'd say find one, and sell it to them.
You'll get 15-19 months LESS, as well as avoiding the mandatory minimums and possibly get out even EARLIER for good behavior - which isn't an option if you're in for drugs.


Violation of the 8th amendment?
I don't know...

I thought actively promoting and contributing to terrorism was worse than being a drug dealer.

Apparently I was wrong...



(search terms; mdma, federal, drug, laws, prison, crime, sentence, time, jail)
 
you know, of course, that the federal sentencing guidelines are advisory, not mandatory.
 
posner said:
you know, of course, that the federal sentencing guidelines are advisory, not mandatory.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but judges still adhere to them 97% of the time.
 
MahanAtma said:
Yeah, but judges still adhere to them 97% of the time.
Click to expand...


They're advisory for all offenses other than drug offenses.

Or... they're advisory until you hit the mandatory minimum sentences that are imposed ONLY on drug offenders...

DUI's don't even require jail time till your third offense...
 
posner said:
It depends on the judge you get.
Click to expand...

Every federal judge I know adheres to them the vast majority of the time.

Do you have a specific judge in mind?
 
posner said:
you know, of course, that the federal sentencing guidelines are advisory, not mandatory.
Click to expand...

Yes federal sentencing guidelines are mandatory.
 
MahanAtma said:
Every federal judge I know adheres to them the vast majority of the time.

Do you have a specific judge in mind?
Click to expand...


The one I work for, whose name I don't wish to disclose on this board (or any other).
 
posner said:
The one I work for, whose name I don't wish to disclose on this board (or any other).
Click to expand...

Well, OK.

Somewhere out there is a study done on sentences handed down post-Booker. If I recall correctly, the number of judges departing from the guidelines was virtually unchanged, and the average length of sentences actually went up.

That was in the first year or so after Booker, though, so maybe things have changed. I think many judges were worried about giving Congress ammunition for doing something about it.

EDIT: Here's the study:

http://www.ussc.gov/booker_report/Booker_Report.pdf

"The severity of sentences imposed has not changed substantially across time. The
average sentence length after Booker has increased."
Click to expand...

The numbers are in Appendix D. When you take out the government-sponsored deparatures (i.e. when the prosecutor cuts you a deal for snitching) and look at the judge-imposed departures, downward departures are granted in only 3.2% of cases. That's pretty damned rare.
 
Last edited:
MahanAtma said:
You mean this is the judge handling your case (not someone who routinely departs from the guidelines)?
Click to expand...


Yeah... he's the one handling my case....

Sorry for the confusion.

pinch.gif





So... 3.2% chance at a downward departure for the other stuff - no criminal history, the act was out of character in an otherwise unblemished life, and financial hardship for the family if they serve the full length of the recommended sentence?

Wow...
That sucks.

Why do they even offer them then?
blink.gif
 
Kalash said:
So... 3.2% chance at a downward departure for the other stuff - no criminal history, the act was out of character in an otherwise unblemished life, and financial hardship for the family if they serve the full length of the recommended sentence?
Click to expand...

Lack of criminal history is factored into the guidelines recommendation.

The other stuff is not likely to result in a downward departure, but your attorney can argue it at the sentencing hearing, and if the judge is decent, he/she will sentence you at the lower end of the range.
 
MahanAtma said:
Lack of criminal history is factored into the guidelines recommendation.

The other stuff is not likely to result in a downward departure, but your attorney can argue it at the sentencing hearing, and if the judge is decent, he/she will sentence you at the lower end of the range.
Click to expand...

So I should revise my opinion of where I'll be...

You mean the sentencing table?
Left to right?

What about the min and max in the sentencing range then?
Because under the lowest criminal history I it's still a 15 month (or so...) range.

How does that get determined?
Judge's digression?

Maybe I'm looking at 4-6 realistically then...
Not 3 1/2-5...
Oh well... still... not that far off....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top