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.

Keywords

prosecutorial discretion real-offense sentencing relevant conduct federal sentencing guidelines

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Albonetti, C. (1997). Sentencing under the federal sentencing guidelines: Effects of defendant characteristics, guilty pleas, and departures on sentence outcomes for drug offenses, 1991-1992. Law and Society Review, 31, 789-822.

American College of Trial Lawyers . (1999). Report and proposal on Section 5K1.1 of the U.S. sentencing guidelines. Irvine, CA: American College of Trial Lawyers.

Berk, R. (1983). An introduction to sample selection bias in sociological data. American Sociological Review, 48, 386-391.

Daly, K. , & Tonry, M. (1997). Gender, race, and sentencing. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (pp. 201-252). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Engen, R. ,& Gainey, R. (2000). Conceptualizing legally relevant factors under guidelines: A reply to Ulmer. Criminology, 4, 1245-1252.

Hanushek, E. , & Jackson, J. (1977). Statistical methods for social scientists. New York: Academic Press.

Heaney, G. (1991). The reality of guidelines sentencing: No end to disparity. American Criminal Law Review, 28, 161-232.

Heckman, J. (1974). Shadows prices, market wages, and labor supply. Econometrics, 42, 679-683.

Hofer, P. , & Blackwell, K. (1999). Searching for discrimination in federal sentencing. Washington, DC: U.S. Sentencing Commission.

10.

Kennedy, E. (1979). Towards a new system of criminal sentencing: Law with order. American Criminal Law Review, 16, 353-381.

11.

Lear, E. (1993). Is conviction irrelevant? UCLA Law Review, 40, 1179-1239.

12.

McDonald, D. , & Carlson, K. (1993). Sentencing in the federal courts: Does race matter? Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.

13.

Nagel, I. , & Schulhofer, S. (1992). A tale of three cities: An empirical study of charging and bargaining practices under the federal sentencing guidelines. Southern California Law Review, 66, 501-566.

14.

Reitz, K. (1993). Sentencing facts: Travesties of real-offense sentencing. Stanford Law Review, 45, 523-573.

15.

Stith, K. , & Cabranes, J. (1998). Fear of judging sentencing guidelines in the federal courts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

16.

Stolzenberg, R. , & Relles, D. (1990). Theory testing in a world of constrained research design: The significance of Heckman’s censored sampling bias correction for nonexperimental research. Sociological Methods and Research, 4, 395-415.

17.

Studenmund, A. (1992). Using econometrics: A practical guide. New York: HarperCollins.

18.

Tonry, M. (1996). Sentencing matters. New York: Oxford University Press.

19.

U.S. Sentencing Commission . (1995). Intensive study sample (ISS). Washington, DC: West Group.

20.

U.S. Sentencing Commission . (2000). Federal sentencing guidelines manual. Washington, DC: West Group.

21.

Wilkins, W., Jr. (1992). The federal sentencing guidelines: Striking an appropriate balance. U.C. Davis Law Review, 25, 571-586.

22.

Wilkins, W., Jr. , & Steer, J. (1990). Relevant conduct: The cornerstone of the federal sentencing guidelines. South Carolina Law Review, 28, 495-521.

23.

Zatz, M. (1987). The changing form of racial/ethnic biases in sentencing. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 25, 69-92.