If you can persuade your judge that the crime does not reflect the real you, then you may qualify for a departure downward from the sentencing guidelines.
Buy Books, Webinars, Consulting, Prison Professors Can Help You
Aberrant Behavior Federal Sentencing Guidelines–What is it?
If charged with a crime, take steps to learn about Aberrant Behavior in the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Learn how to get the best outcome. Prison
What does aberrant behavior mean?
How can downward departures for aberrant behavior in the federal sentencing guidelines influence your better outcome?
The following article provides a simple lesson. For those who don’t know much about the federal sentencing guidelines, let me tell you what I have learned.
What Do We Know?
I’m Michael Santos, a co-founder of Prison Professors. My partner (Shon Hopwood) and I learned about the federal prison system and the federal sentencing system from a different perspective. Shon learned about the law while he served time in federal prison. Following his release, Shon went to law school. After graduating, he became a clerk for the DC Circuit Court. Now Shon is a professor of law at Georgetown University. Shon is the author of Law Man and he is a nationally recognized expert on sentencing and post-conviction relief.
While serving 26 years in federal prison, I studied how the system operates. I wrote scores of books about the federal prison system and how to succeed through it. To write those books, I interviewed more than one thousand people. Each person was sentenced to federal prison. Since concluding my term, I served as a professor at San Francisco State University.
Universities and judicial conferences from across the country have hired me as a keynote speaker. They ask me to share what I’ve learned. One lesson I like to speak about is how the federal sentencing guidelines influence people. I also share steps people can take to influence how judges apply the federal sentencing guidelines to their case. All of that is part of my sentence-mitigation work.
From our work, both Shon and I learned a great deal. Although I’m not a lawyer, by studying the federal guidelines manual and interviewing people that were sentenced to federal prison, I have learned about sentencing. Those lessons can help anyone who faces criminal charges. When federal prosecutors bring charges, a sentencing hearing follows in about 90% of all cases.
Brief History of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines
Judges began applying the federal sentencing guidelines soon after my arrest. The Sentencing Reform Act required judges to sentence people who were charged with crimes that occurred after November 1, 1987, in accordance with the guidelines.
Prior to the Sentencing Reform Act, judges had more discretion. They had to abide by statutes. Yet judges could sentence people to terms within a range of those statutes. Those sentencing ranges could span multiple decades. A judge in one part of the country might sentence a person to 20 years for a crime. A judge in a different part of the country might sentence a person to 3 years for a conviction
Those disparities in sentencing led Congress to pass the Sentencing Reform Act (SRA). The SRA led to the U.S. Sentencing Commission. Judges, legislators, scholars, and academics serve on the Commission. Members of the Commission studied sentences that judges imposed in different jurisdictions for similar crimes. Findings from those studies gave members of the Sentencing Commission real insight. They saw a need for more uniformity in sentencing. The U.S. Federal Sentencing Guidelines were the result.
phx_commlistThe U.S. Federal Sentencing Guidelines put crimes into different categories. Each crime had a certain severity rating. Those severity ratings started with a Level 1 offense. The most severe federal offense carried a Level 43 sentence. Each of those levels appeared on a vertical scale of the guidelines table.
In addition to the severity level of the offense, the guidelines included a criminal history category. In other words, judges would also consider how many times authorities brought a person into the criminal justice system. If judges or juries found that a person committed crimes in the past, the Criminal History Category would result in “points” which influenced a higher sentencing range. Those Criminal History Points stretched across a horizontal row on the guidelines table.
The Offense Level and Criminal History Category formed a spreadsheet grid of columns and rows. Federal Probation Officers would conduct Presentence Investigation Reports (PSRs) that judges would rely upon to understand the offender’s guideline range. The individual cells provided the range of sentences that judges could impose. According to members of the U.S. Sentencing Commission, those sentencing ranges represented sentences within “the heartland.”
Downward Departures in the U.S. Federal Sentencing Guidelines
The sentencing ranges provided judges with a starting point. But not every individual fell into the heartland. Some people had unique circumstances. Those individual factors could result in downward departures from the U.S. Federal Sentencing Guidelines.
Make sure you consider Aberrant Behavior in the Federal Sentencing Guidelines when arguing for your lower sentence.
It’s important to recognize that prosecutors will resist requests for Downward Departures from the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Consider the “Protect Act,” enacted on April 30, 2003. Former Attorney General John Ashcroft instructed all federal prosecutors to oppose any downward departure if the facts or law didn’t support the departure. The Attorney General also issued a policy that required prosecutors to charge and pursue “the most serious, readily provable offense.”
Such policies influenced the modern era of mass incarceration. Prosecutors want to advance their careers. As such, they oppose departures and they argue for the stiffest possible sentences.
Defense attorneys will fight valiantly in their arguments for downward departures. Yet any individual who faces a criminal charge should work to show why he is worthy of a downward departure. That person may argue for a downward departure from the US Federal Sentencing Guidelines on the basis of aberrant behavior.
Aberrant Behavior in the Federal Sentencing Guidelines
Build a case to show that you’re worthy of mercy. When applicable, show the court that your actions do not reflect the real you. You may see yourself one way. In your view, you are a good person. You may live as a taxpayer, a father, and a husband. You may be a mother, a daughter, and a wife. You may coach children. You may attend church. You may help widows and orphans.
Despite all of those virtues, prosecutors will follow rules and policies mandated by the Department of Justice. As described above, they will oppose any request for a downward departure. Still, the judge has the discretion to consider the person’s entire history.
According to Title 18 USC § 3553, judges must consider several factors when they impose a sentence. Those factors include the following statement at (b) (1):
Unless the court finds that there exists an aggravating or mitigating circumstance of a kind, or a to a degree, not adequately taken into consideration by the Sentencing Commission in formulating the guidelines that should result in a sentence different from that described.
The above paragraph puts a responsibility on a person who has been charged. How can the person argue that the Sentencing Commission did not fully understand the defendant? A person can help by showing that the criminal activity was not a part of his character. Rather, the person should write a story that describes his life. Describe the influences that led you to where you stand today. Help the judge understand the A-to-Z factors that led to the criminal charge.
If a grand jury charged you with a wire fraud offense, for example, show why the activity was an aberrant act. Show that your actions in the offense do not reflect your character. If you can make that case, you advance your prospect for a better outcome.
Help the judge understand why Aberrant Behavior in the Federal Sentencing Guidelines is an appropriate downward departure for you.
A person who can show that he does not live a criminal lifestyle can move the needle at sentencing. Judges want to know.
What steps are you taking to show that your criminal conviction does not reflect your way of life? You must anticipate that the prosecutor will object. What steps can you take today to overcome those objections?
Our work at Prison Professors shows all that we’ve learned from interviewing more than 1,000 people who have been sentenced. Further, as speakers, we interact with many federal judges.
For example, I was a keynote speaker at the UC Hastings Law School symposium on federal sentence reform. While there, I interacted with many federal judges, including Judge Charles R. Breyer. Judge Breyer is the Vice Chair of the United States Sentencing Commission. At the Robina Institute, I am a member of the advisory panel, and I serve alongside J. Patricia Wilson Smoot, a Commissioner of the United Sentencing Commission.
My interactions with federal judges across the United States, and members of the U.S. Sentencing
At Prison Professors, we invite you to read through all of our content. Watch our videos. Learn from the many free resources that we provide. Subscribe to us on YouTube so that you can receive updates on when we produce new content. Or subscribe to our newsletter and our posts will come to your email automatically.
If you want expert guidance to assist you with a sentence mitigation effort, contact us today. Make sure you include an effective argument to show why Aberrant Behavior in the Federal Sentencing Guidelines applies to you.