Prosecutorial Discretion and Real-Offense Sentencing: An Analysis of Relevant Conduct under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines

Abstract

The primary objective of the federal sentencing guidelines is to reduce judicial discretion and unwarranted disparity by prescribing like sentences for like defendants convicted of the same offense. The guidelines are based on real-offense sentencing, which links relevant conduct or actual offense behavior to the sentencing process. This study analyzes the indictment stage where the charging decisions by the federal prosecutor in conjunction with relevant conduct are first conceived. Our major finding is that the number of counts within the indictment has a statistically significant effect on the length of sentence, the magnitude of the discount for downward departures, and the ratio of the difference between the presumptive sentence and the sentence discount. The number of counts has no effect on the offender’s likelihood of receiving either a downward departure or a substantial assistance departure. This suggests that offenders convicted of the same crime do not necessarily receive the same sentence.

Recent Developments and New Directions in Sentencing Research

“…Wilmot and Spohn (2004) studied 348 federal defendants sentenced in FY 1995 (a USSC Intensive Study Sample), with data from indictment to sentencing. They found that the number of indictment charges filed by federal prosecutors significantly increased sentence lengths (each additional charge increased predicted sentences by 6 months), and NEW DIRECTIONS IN SENTENCING 19 decreased the likelihood of substantial assistance or other downward departures.…”

Effects of Individual Characteristics on Plea Negotiations Under Sentencing Guidelines

“…Decisions by prosecutors can impact later decisions (e.g., bail and sentencing) by other members of the court (see Johnson, 2003;Kellough & Wortley, 2002;Wilmot & Spohn, 2004). Wooldredge and Thistlethwaite (2004) found that earlier decisions by the prosecutor resulted in more favorable dispositions at the charging stage yet less favorable at the conviction and/or sentencing stage.…”

Sentencing Outcomes Under Competing But Coexisting Sentencing Interventions: Untying The Gordian Knot

“…9 and "substantial assistance" 10 provisions, the Guidelines shifted power and discretion in the courtroom largely from the judge to the prosecutor (Wilmot & Spohn, 2004), augmenting an already vast realm of unfettered discretion. Fourth, the Guidelines' "relevant conduct" standard treats federal drug offenses uniquely because, by definition, drug distribution is a conspiratorial crime.…”