How Presumptive Sentencing Applies in Federal Counterfeiting Cases

How Presumptive Sentencing Applies in Federal Counterfeiting Cases

Counterfeiting cases at the federal level are governed by specific laws and regulations. There are mandatory minimum sentences that apply when someone is convicted of certain counterfeiting offenses. However, judges have some discretion in applying these sentences. This article will explain the key aspects of presumptive sentencing for federal counterfeiting convictions.

Counterfeiting Laws

The main law covering counterfeiting at the federal level is 18 U.S.C. Section 471. This law makes it illegal to counterfeit or forge any obligation or other security of the United States. It also covers passing or attempting to pass counterfeit securities. The penalty is up to 20 years in prison.

Another relevant law is 18 U.S.C. Section 472, which deals with possessing or concealing counterfeit items. The penalty here is up to 15 years in prison.

There are also laws prohibiting the counterfeiting of specific items like coins, bank notes, postage stamps, etc. The penalties vary but can include up to 25 years in prison.

Mandatory Minimum Sentences

For certain federal counterfeiting offenses, there are mandatory minimum prison sentences that apply. This means the judge is required by law to impose at least that sentence. Two examples:

• Counterfeiting involving over $2,000 – There is a mandatory minimum sentence of 24 months (2 years) in prison.
• A repeat counterfeiting offender – There is a mandatory minimum sentence of 60 months (5 years) in prison if the person was previously convicted of a counterfeiting offense.

So in those cases, the judge does not have any discretion to go below 2 or 5 years in prison respectively.

Sentencing Guidelines

Federal judges also have to consider the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines when determining sentences for counterfeiting offenses. The guidelines provide recommended sentencing ranges based on the details of the case and the defendant’s criminal history.

While judges have some flexibility to depart from the guidelines, they are required to calculate and consider them. So the guidelines provide presumptive sentencing ranges that apply in most counterfeiting cases.

How the Guidelines Work

Under the Sentencing Guidelines, each defendant starts with a “base offense level” that is then adjusted up or down based on specific offense characteristics. For example, the amount of loss or value of counterfeit items can increase the offense level and sentence.

The guidelines also use the defendant’s criminal history to place them in one of six criminal history categories. Each category, combined with the offense level, gives a recommended sentencing range in months.

Without any departures, the judge will impose a sentence within that range. The guidelines provide standardized sentences based on the circumstances, which is how presumptive sentencing applies.

Downward Departures from Guidelines

There are certain circumstances where a judge can issue a more lenient sentence than the guidelines recommend. This is called a “downward departure.” Some reasons a judge might depart down include:

• The defendant had a minor role in the offense
• The defendant’s criminal history score over-represents their past crimes
• The defendant provided substantial assistance to prosecutors

However, in cases where a mandatory minimum sentence applies, the judge cannot go below that sentence regardless of the reasons for departure.

Upward Departures from Guidelines

Judges can also depart upward from the guidelines in certain aggravating circumstances. Reasons for harsher sentences include:

• The counterfeiting substantially disrupted government operations
• The offense involved sophisticated means to create or distribute the counterfeit items
• The defendant had a leadership role in extensive criminal activity

So while the guidelines provide a presumptive sentencing range, judges have some ability to go higher or lower based on the specific case facts.

Common Defenses in Counterfeiting Cases

There are a few common defenses that defendants raise in counterfeiting cases to try to avoid conviction or reduce sentences. Some examples include:

• Lack of knowledge – Arguing the defendant did not know the item was counterfeit or they were deceived into believing it was authentic.
• Entrapment – Claiming law enforcement induced the defendant to commit the crime when they otherwise wouldn’t have.
• Duress – Arguing the defendant only engaged in the counterfeiting due to threats of harm against themselves or family members.
• Consent – Asserting the defendant had permission or authorization from the rights holder to use the trademark, copyright, etc.

The viability of these defenses depends a lot on the specific facts and evidence in each case. But they illustrate some ways defendants try to fight the charges.

Takeaways

Here are some key points about presumptive sentencing for federal counterfeiting convictions:

• Mandatory minimum prison sentences apply to certain counterfeiting offenses.
• Federal Sentencing Guidelines provide recommended sentencing ranges judges must consider.
• The guidelines ranges are presumptive, but judges have some discretion to depart in either direction.
• Defenses aim to show lack of criminal intent, law enforcement misconduct, or authorization for the conduct.

Presumptive sentencing structures and mandatory minimums significantly limit judicial discretion in counterfeiting cases. The potential prison sentences are quite severe. Defendants face an uphill legal battle given the strength of the laws.