Arguing for a Below-Guidelines Sentence in Your Federal Case in New York

Arguing for a Below-Guidelines Sentence in Your Federal Case in New York

If you’re facing federal charges in New York, you may be wondering if it’s possible to get a more lenient sentence than what the federal sentencing guidelines recommend. The good news is that it is often possible to argue for and receive a below-guidelines sentence, even in federal court. This article will explain how federal sentencing works, when a judge can go below the guidelines, and effective strategies for arguing for leniency.

How Federal Sentencing Works

Federal judges use the United States Sentencing Guidelines to determine the appropriate sentence for a defendant. The guidelines provide a range of recommended sentences based on the defendant’s criminal history and the nature of the offense. This range is called the “guideline range.” Judges are not required to sentence within the guideline range, but they must consider it. They can go above or below the range if certain factors justify it.

For example, let’s say a defendant is convicted of bank fraud involving a loss of $120,000. Under the guidelines, this offense would have a base offense level of 7. If the defendant had no prior record, their guideline range might be 10-16 months. This would be the starting point, but the judge could impose something lower or higher depending on the case facts.

When Judges Can Go Below the Guidelines

Federal law allows judges to go below the guideline range if the court finds “there exists an aggravating or mitigating circumstance of a kind, or to a degree, not adequately taken into consideration by the Sentencing Commission.” In other words, if there are facts about the case or defendant that the guidelines don’t fully account for, the judge can consider those to impose a lower sentence.

Some common reasons judges depart downward include:

• The victim’s wrongful conduct contributed to the offense
• The defendant committed the offense under coercion or duress
• The defendant’s mental or emotional condition reduced their culpability
• The defendant provided substantial assistance to the government
• The defendant already spent a long time in pre-trial detention

Judges can also “vary” from the guidelines if they find the guideline range is greater than necessary to achieve the goals of sentencing. Unlike a departure, a variance does not require any special circumstances beyond the ordinary case facts.

How to Argue for a Below-Guidelines Sentence

An experienced federal criminal defense lawyer can make compelling arguments for a below-guidelines sentence in your case. Here are some effective strategies:

Emphasize the Good Things About the Defendant

Bring out the positive aspects of the defendant’s life and character. Their educational achievements, steady employment history, charitable activities, family ties, lack of substance abuse issues, etc. Remind the judge that guidelines are for a “typical” case – your client is not typical.

Note Ways the Guidelines Overstate the Offense Severity

Explain why the guidelines exaggerate the seriousness of the offense. For example, in fraud cases, argue the actual loss amount overstates the harm because it’s a “paper loss.” Or the scheme was unsophisticated and unlikely to succeed. Ask for a departure under §5K2.0.

Explain How Personal Circumstances Mitigate Culpability

Detail any special life circumstances that help explain why your client committed this offense or reduced their ability to make good choices. Traumatic experiences, chronic health conditions, family obligations, or economic desperation may justify a lower sentence.

Highlight Sentencing Disparities

Point out how the proposed guideline range is disproportionate compared to average sentences imposed for similar offenses in this and other courts. Judges can consider avoiding unwarranted disparities under 18 USC §3553(a)(6).

Note the Availability of Alternative Punishments

Argue that alternatives to prison like home confinement, community service, or probation are sufficient punishment. Emphasize that studies show alternatives provide deterrence without the negative effects of imprisonment.

Remind the Judge They Have Discretion

Judges sometimes feel bound to the guidelines even when they aren’t. Cite cases where the court imposed below-guideline sentences to reassure the judge they have authority to do so. You can also note the parsimony principle in §3553(a) directs sentences be “sufficient but not greater than necessary” to comply with sentencing purposes.

Other Strategies and Considerations

Some other tips for getting a below-guidelines sentence in federal court:

• Offer expert testimony about mental health or other mitigating factors
• Get support letters from community leaders, employers, etc.
• Compile statistics on average sentences for this offense
• Negotiate a downward departure motion from the prosecution
• Highlight post-offense rehabilitation efforts
• File detailed objections to the PSR guideline calculations
• Present a well-researched sentencing memorandum

Keep in mind that the judge will carefully consider the sentencing factors in 18 USC §3553(a), so address those factors in your arguments. Be prepared to explain why a lower sentence won’t endanger public safety or fail to provide a just punishment. Sentencing advocacy in federal court is complex, so having an experienced federal criminal defense lawyer is key.

With smart advocacy and compelling mitigating evidence, it’s often possible to obtain a more lenient below-guidelines sentence – even in federal court. Don’t hesitate to explore this option in your federal case in New York.