This is an important question. What it means is that when a judge looks at the federal sentencing guidelines in determining what they are going to sentence a criminal defendant to, do they have to follow precisely what the guidelines say, or can they go outside the guidelines?
The answer is that they can go outside the guidelines. They could either go below the guidelines, at the guidelines, or above. They have to justify it and consult the guidelines as a starting point for a federal judge when figuring out what a sentence will be.
The federal sentencing guidelines are basic rules that federal judges must consider when sentencing a defendant convicted of a federal crime.
These guidelines are primarily designed to provide federal judges with fair and consistent sentencing ranges to consider when imposing a sentence. They are based on the crime's severity and the defendant's criminal history.
As noted, they are not mandatory. Any federal judge who wants to impose a different sentence, either higher or lower than the calculated sentence, must explain their decision in writing.
The federal Sentencing Guidelines are written by the United States Sentencing Commission, a body that operates within the federal government's judicial branch. The Commission is responsible for establishing sentencing policies and practices for the federal courts, ensuring fair and consistent sentencing across the country.
The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 created guidelines for federal sentences. Congress attempted to narrow the disparity in sentences imposed for similar offenses committed by someone in similar circumstances.
Sentences in federal criminal cases, either based on a negotiated plea deal with the government or after a jury finds the defendant guilty, start with the United States Sentencing Guidelines.
They are a detailed series of provisions that compare a defendant's unlawful conduct with their prior criminal history. Thus, they arrive at a presumptive range of months for which a defendant should be incarcerated. Our federal criminal defense lawyers will review this topic further below.
Initial Strategy Meeting
If you or a loved one is facing a federal case, it's crucial to have an experienced federal criminal defense attorney by your side. They can guide you through the complexities of the federal court system, providing reassurance and support during this challenging time.
Some people come into my office, and they've had state cases before but never a federal case, and they think that it works just like in the state, which could not be further from the truth. You don't want to be under a misconception in a federal case:
- as it relates to bail,
- as it relates to sentencing,
- as it relates to how the process works.
That's why you should consult an experienced attorney if you have a federal criminal case.
I've been doing this for nearly 30 years, representing people at both the state and federal levels, so I have a good idea about the differences between them and how to put yourself in the best position when it comes to a federal case.
Negotiating with the Federal Prosecutor
When you decide to hire an attorney, it's because you believe the government has evidence against you. In this situation, your attorney's role is crucial. They will negotiate with the federal prosecutor on your behalf, aiming to secure the best possible outcome for you. If you're in this position, I encourage you to reach out. Let me put my 30 years of experience to work for you.
I started working for the prosecutors in 1992, and in 1993, I worked for a judge as his research attorney. Finally, in 1994, I opened up my criminal defense practice, representing people like you.
So, if you need the best, you or your loved one has a federal criminal case and are trying to figure out what a judge might sentence you to, come and sit down with me.
We'll go over everything. We'll talk about the case. We'll look at the federal sentencing guidelines. I'll explain to you how they work, how we look at the criminal history and your offense level, and then how the judges decide what type of sentence they'll give a person.
A judge who decides that aggravating or mitigating circumstance exists can impose a sentence below or above the guideline range. But, if they choose to depart from the guidelines, they must state their reason in writing.
If the sentence is upwardly oriented, the defendant can appeal, and if it's downwardly oriented, the government can appeal the decision.
A special type of downward departure request by the federal prosecutor is called “substantial assistance.” A federal judge could grant it when a defendant provided substantial cooperation in the criminal investigation of another offender.
What is the Booker Case?
If I touch on it a little bit here, you've got to realize that it is essential in federal sentencing.
Your attorney gets to submit your position and character letters, the government lawyers get to submit their position and whatever other information they have related to the case, and there's a probation department that weighs in on it, interviews a defendant in the case, and writes a report for the judge.
So, the judge gets those three things before deciding. Then, the judge has to consult the sentencing guidelines about the potential sentence for crimes like yours that put you in a specific category. Then the judge, under what's called the Booker case, which is a case that came out by our Supreme Court, says that the judge gets to decide what the sentence is; they have to consult with the federal sentencing guidelines.
Hopefully, what I've written here has given you some insight into how things work. It's a complex system, so to get all the answers to your questions and decide whether you want to hire me as your attorney, you must schedule a meeting. I stand ready to help you.
The Hedding Law Firm is located in Los Angeles, California. We provide legal representation on federal criminal matters across the United States. You can contact us for a free case consultation by phone or using the contact form.
Related Content:
