Podcasts about Sentencing guidelines

Africa Melane speaks to Jonathan Ratshibvumo, Founder and Chairperson of the Association of Former Judicial Officers of Southern Africa joins us to unpack what courts consider during sentencing. Early Breakfast with Africa Melane is 702’s and CapeTalk’s early morning talk show. Experienced broadcaster Africa Melane brings you the early morning news, sports, business, and interviews politicians and analysts to help make sense of the world. He also enjoys chatting to guests in the lifestyle sphere and the Arts. All the interviews are podcasted for you to catch-up and listen. Thank you for listening to this podcast from Early Breakfast with Africa Melane For more about the show click https://buff.ly/XHry7eQ and find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/XJ10LBU Listen live on weekdays between 04:00 and 06:00 (SA Time) to the Early Breakfast with Africa Melane broadcast on 702 https://buff.ly/gk3y0Kj and CapeTalk https://buff.ly/NnFM3N Subscribe to the 702 and CapeTalk daily and weekly newsletters https://buff.ly/v5mfetc Follow us on social media: 702 on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TalkRadio702 702 on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@talkradio702 702 on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/talkradio702/ 702 on X: https://x.com/Radio702 702 on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@radio702 CapeTalk on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@capetalk CapeTalk on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ CapeTalk on X: https://x.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CapeTalk567 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On today's episode of Uncommon Sense with Ginny Robinson, we continue unpacking the devastating revelations found in the Epstein files. What's been exposed isn't just corruption, it's a system that protects powerful criminals while innocent victims are silenced.The facts are very disturbing. There has been absolutely no accountability. And the victims deserve more than headlines and non-answers.We're asking hard questions about leadership, responsibility, and why justice still feels so out of reach. If powerful names are involved, then powerful action must follow. No more silence. No more avoidance. The victims deserve truth, and they deserve justice. NOW.--https://www.bible.com/

The Jay Thomas Show from Tuesday October 21st, 2025.  Guests include your calls and emails.

If you're curious about the machinery of high-stakes criminal trials, want to understand the strategy behind post-conviction moves, or just love hearing behind-the-scenes details from seasoned legal minds, this episode's for you. Welcome back to Lawyer Talk, where legal education meets real-world controversy! In this episode, host Steve Palmer teams up with law student Troy Hendrickson for a special "law school edition" focused on the high-profile P Diddy trial. The guys dig into the nitty gritty of what happens between conviction and sentencing, breaking down the so-called “throwaway” post-trial motions and whether they ever actually work.From LeBron James' famous party quote to the real implications of a compromise verdict, Steve and Troy peel back the layers of legal strategy used in Diddy's defense—discussing grand juries, jury instructions, and the difference between a good argument and a long shot. They also cover why lawyers sometimes file motions more for publicity than for results, and what kind of jail time credit Diddy might expect after almost two years behind bars.Moments00:00 "Strategic 'Throwaway' Court Motions"04:42 "Trial Objections and Appeals"06:47 "Always Object in Court"10:14 "Grand Jury's Role Examined"14:50 "Prosecutorial Misconduct Claim Raised"16:54 Sentencing Guidelines and Considerations19:39 "Struggling for Connection"3 Key Takeaways:Post-Trial Motions Matter (But Aren't Magic Bullets):Defense attorneys often file motions for a new trial between conviction and sentencing. While many see these as “throwaway” or strategic filings, sometimes they're essential for preserving arguments or highlighting egregious errors like jury misconduct.Grand Jury Isn't Always a Shield:The episode highlights how the grand jury process, intended as a safeguard against baseless charges, is often procedural rather than protective. Prosecutors nearly always get indictments—even with flimsy evidence—making it challenging for defendants facing stacked charges.Publicity & Sentencing Strategy:High-profile cases come with unique challenges. Lawyers might file post-conviction motions not just for legal reasons, but also to shape public perception. Additionally, sentencing memoranda and jail-time credit play big roles in the ultimate outcome, sometimes overlooked in law school teachings.Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.Recorded at Channel 511.Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.Steve has unique experience handling numerous high publicity cases that have garnered national attention.For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense. Copyright 2025 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

Mark and Gary break down Sean “Diddy” Combs' 50-month sentence, explore the legal strategy behind sentencing guidelines, and weigh the potential for early release, appeal, or even clemency. Plus, insight into how the judge factored in acquitted conduct, reactions from the courtroom, and what Puff's next steps may be.Watch Beyond A Reasonable Doubt and all Reasonable Doubt video content on YouTube exclusively at YouTube.com/ReasonableDoubtPodcast and subscribe while you're thereSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

An effective compliance program, as outlined in the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, incorporates seven key elements to prevent and detect organizational misconduct. First, organizations must establish clear standards and procedures to ensure legal and ethical conduct, supported by comprehensive training and communication to promote awareness. Second, high-level personnel must oversee the program, ensuring accountability, while specific individuals are responsible for its implementation. Finally, regular monitoring, auditing, a system for confidentially reporting violations, consistent enforcement, and periodic risk assessments ensure the program's ongoing effectiveness. Two CITI Program colleagues, Andra M. Popa, JD, LLM, Assistant Director of Healthcare Compliance, and Anne Hawkins-Badge, DHSc, MSPH, Assistant Director of Environmental Health and Safety, discuss their respective regulatory expertise that directly aligns with the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines' seven key elements. In their discussion, they highlight the similarities and skills that may apply to a professional compliance position from their respective backgrounds.  Additional Resources: CITI Program's Healthcare Solution:                https://about.citiprogram.org/solutions/healthcare/ CITI Program's Health and Safety Solution: https://about.citiprogram.org/solutions/health-safety/ CITI Program's Higher Education Training Solution: https://about.citiprogram.org/solutions/higher-education/  

In June 2022, Maxwell's legal team submitted a 77-page sentencing memorandum to the U.S. District Court in Manhattan requesting a significant downward variance from both the Probation Department's recommendation and the federal Sentencing Guidelines. While the probation office had proposed a 20-year sentence (240 months), Maxwell's attorneys argued she should receive only 51 to 63 months in prison. They maintained that Maxwell should not be punished as a proxy for Jeffrey Epstein, emphasizing he was the principal orchestrator of the crimes and that Maxwell had never before been charged with wrongdoing until her association with him resurfaced. Her defense also cited her difficult and traumatic childhood, abusive father, and the death threats she continues to face as aggravating circumstances warranting leniency.Prosecutors forcefully opposed the request, urging the court instead to impose a prison term within the Guidelines range—between 30 to 55 years—based on Maxwell's “pivotal role” in grooming and recruiting vulnerable young girls for Epstein. They highlighted her lack of remorse, failure to accept responsibility, and the profound and enduring harm caused to numerous victims. The prosecutors made clear that Maxwell's privileged background offered no mitigation given the extreme gravity of her crimes.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/15/ghislaine-maxwell-sex-trafficking-sentenceBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In June 2022, Maxwell's legal team submitted a 77-page sentencing memorandum to the U.S. District Court in Manhattan requesting a significant downward variance from both the Probation Department's recommendation and the federal Sentencing Guidelines. While the probation office had proposed a 20-year sentence (240 months), Maxwell's attorneys argued she should receive only 51 to 63 months in prison. They maintained that Maxwell should not be punished as a proxy for Jeffrey Epstein, emphasizing he was the principal orchestrator of the crimes and that Maxwell had never before been charged with wrongdoing until her association with him resurfaced. Her defense also cited her difficult and traumatic childhood, abusive father, and the death threats she continues to face as aggravating circumstances warranting leniency.Prosecutors forcefully opposed the request, urging the court instead to impose a prison term within the Guidelines range—between 30 to 55 years—based on Maxwell's “pivotal role” in grooming and recruiting vulnerable young girls for Epstein. They highlighted her lack of remorse, failure to accept responsibility, and the profound and enduring harm caused to numerous victims. The prosecutors made clear that Maxwell's privileged background offered no mitigation given the extreme gravity of her crimes.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/15/ghislaine-maxwell-sex-trafficking-sentence

Although we often complain about the sentencing guidelines, this week, I find myself thankful that we still live in a country that has courts and due process, in the federal criminal courts.  At least for now.  So today, we celebrate the death of guideline departures, lament the death of due process in immigration, and worry for the future of this democracy. That's why we start off talking about the plight of Kilmar Garcia-Abrego, a person lawfully in this country who was abducted by brownshirt immigration thugs and stolen away in the night to a concentration camp in El Salvador.  No notice. No hearing. No due process.  No contact with a lawyer or loved ones.  No prospect for release – ever.  That's why we start off talking about the plight of Kilmar Garcia-Abrego, a person lawfulfully in this country who was abucted by brownshirt immigration thugs and stolen away in the night to a concentration camp in El Salvador.  No notice. No hearing. No due process.  No contact with a lawyer or loved ones.  No prospect for release – ever.  This is who we are now.  Pay attention.   IN THIS EPISODE: Kilmar Garcia Abrego: authoritarianism is here, and we are in a full constitutional crisis.  If they can do this to him, they can do it to ANYBODY… and they will. Lost Lore tequila! New changes to the Supervised Release guideline; A warning – if you are successful in arguing against supervised release, you could impact your client's ability to earn early release from prison; The goal of S/R, in no incertain terms, is REHABILITATION!  But courts are using it as punishment, and routinely imposing prison terms for said violations.  Therefore, the new guideline amendments make clear that this is not, by default, the appropriate result! The death of “upward departures” and simplification of the “three step process”; The difference between guideline “departures” and “adjustments”; The vindication of the need to telling our clients' life stories; Things in the “goddamn Sentencing Reform Act that were directed to the Commission 40 years ago to take into consideration when it promulgated the fucking guidelines, that it still has not done.”  (Mark's colorful language), the biggest one being the sad state of affairs at the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Talk of moving BOP to DHS and the future banishment to concentration camps of US Citizens.   LINKS:  "Reader-friendly" guidelines amendments from Sentencing Commission: https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/amendment-process/reader-friendly-amendments/202504_prelim-rf.pdf   Timothy Synder's On Tyranny: 20 lessons from the 20th century:  Last episode we talked about the lesson of language (domestic terrorism).  Today we talk about not “obeying in advance” when an authoritarian begins to test the limits of his power.  If we let what is happening to Mr. Abrego Garcia and those like him, we are lost.  Here's a great video of John Lithgow reciting all 20 lessons.  Learn them.  Take action.  https://youtu.be/cXR5HLodsT8?si=KfukKSdAPEfytSLE   There's a new "open letter" circulating on Facebook and beyond, purportedly written by Liz Cheney.  She's not the author.  But the letter is right on. It's a blueprint for resistance.  Take a look. https://www.facebook.com/lisa.mcmanus.77736/posts/10231541262169329?ref=embed_post    Mark Allenbaugh Law Review Article:  Sentencing in Chaos: How Statistics Can Harmonize the “Discordant Symphony”.  To Download a Copy of Mark's article, please visit the Set For Sentencing main page for this episode:  https://www.setforsentencing.com/seismic

The Government has published “emergency legislation” — the Sentencing Guidelines (Pre-sentence Reports) Bill — to block new guidelines coming into effect that single out differential treatment of ethnic minority offenders when ordering pre-sentencing reports. These reports would then be used by judges to make decisions on sentencing. Critics are calling it a case of “two-tier justice.” The Lord Chancellor Shabana Mahmood says there's “insufficient democratic oversight” of how the Sentencing Council operates. In this episode, Ruth and Mark examine Parliament's limited ability to scrutinise Sentencing Council guidelines — why that's the case, how it could have been different, and why successive governments have failed to address it. They trace the issue back to a 2009 “Christmas Tree” law that had so many policy baubles it was difficult to scrutinise, an enduring trend of outsourcing decision-making to arms-length bodies, and a culture of “perma-crisis” that has defined UK politics for over 15 years. Also in this episode: Chancellor Rachel Reeves' big moment before the Treasury Committee is eclipsed by President Trump's shock international tariff announcement. At the Transport Committee, Heathrow's Chief Executive issues a full apology for the massive flight disruption caused by a power station fire that brought the Airport to a halt. Meanwhile, MPs with disabilities and health conditions testify before the Commons Modernisation Committee about the challenges they face navigating Westminster - the building and the procedures. Plus: Did Hertfordshire Police cross a constitutional line by warning former Deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden MP not to look into the arrest of two of his constituents over “disparaging comments” they made in their child's school WhatsApp group? Ruth and Mark consider how other cases involving vexatious constituents have been handled by MPs and how the issues engage parliamentary privilege. After Cory Booker's 25-hour speech in the US Senate, could a filibuster ever happen in Westminster? (Spoiler: absolutely not.) And should MPs be lobbying foreign governments to build airports when they oppose them here in the UK?

​In her June 2022 sentencing memorandum, Ghislaine Maxwell requested a significant reduction from the advisory Sentencing Guidelines range of 292 to 365 months, as well as from the 240-month sentence recommended by the Probation Department. Her defense argued that her association with Jeffrey Epstein, which occurred decades prior, led to her current legal situation. They emphasized that Maxwell had not faced any accusations before her involvement with Epstein or in the 20 years following the conduct in question.Maxwell's attorneys also highlighted her challenging upbringing, particularly her relationship with her father, the late British publishing magnate Robert Maxwell, who they described as abusive. They suggested that this background made her susceptible to Epstein's influence. Additionally, the defense pointed to the harsh conditions of her pre-trial confinement, including being placed on suicide watch, as factors warranting a lighter sentence. They contended that these conditions were unusually severe and should be considered in mitigation.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Welcome to the award-winning FCPA Compliance Report, the longest-running compliance podcast. In this episode, Tom welcomes Eric Morehead to discuss the role and function of the U.S. Sentencing Commission. Eric is the Director of Advisory Services Solutions at LRN and former Assistant General Counsel at the U.S. Sentencing Commission. He and Tom review the intricacies of the U.S. Sentencing Commission's role, structure, and impact. Eric walks through his professional journey and explains the Sentencing Commission's function in standardizing federal criminal sentences and promoting organizational compliance programs. He emphasizes the importance of the Sentencing Guidelines, the process for their amendment, and the challenges faced by the Commission, such as quorum issues. The discussion also touches on current topics, including the potential impact of executive orders on DEI policies and the FCPA pause, stressing the continued relevance of the Sentencing Guidelines in compliance program development. Key highlights: Eric Morehead's Background and Role at the U.S. Sentencing Commission Understanding the U.S. Sentencing Commission Process of Creating and Amending Sentencing Guidelines Impact of Sentencing Guidelines on Compliance Programs Current Issues in Compliance: DEI and FCPA Enforcement Resources: Eric Morehead on LinkedIn LRN US Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations Tom Fox Instagram Facebook YouTube Twitter LinkedIn Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On today's #NCFNewspeak, the NCF team discuss: * Equality Before the Law is DEAD. Sentencing guidelines disadvantage white men. * A Royal Ramadan: Britain's elites prioritize Islam over Christianity * Trump's New World Order

Jonathan Byrne and Josh Carpenter of the Western District of North Carolina Federal Public Defender Office discuss recent Fourth Circuit and Sentencing Guidelines news.

On November 1, several amendments to the United States Sentencing Guidelines took effect. Some of these changes are significant, offering advantages to the defense, while others are less beneficial. However, ultimately, this process amounts to nothing more than "Kabuki Theatre," meaning the tortured guideline applications become merely performative, because 18 U.S.C. § 3553, enables discerning judges to overlook the sentencing recommendations provided by the guidelines. Thus, it is crucial to be informed about these amendments to argue effectively whether and how they should be considered in the final analysis.   IN THIS EPISODE:  Some eye-popping facts and stats after forty years of guideline sentencing; Relevant conduct amendment to now exclude acquitted conduct (but it comes with a big but…) Possibility that new litigation may void the Kisor fix because of commission overreach by overriding congress and/or resolving circuit splits;   The “Kisor” work-around to fix the intended loss issue under the fraud guideline; The implication and larger application of the Kisor workaround – i.e., support for the argument that for other guidelines, if it's in the commentary, it doesn't count; Clarification of the new Zero Point Offender provisions (ZPO) to deny eligibility for anyone who gets an upward role adjustment; And, perhaps the one bright spot, adding a potential downward departure for “youthful offenders” (mid-20's or less); Practice tips for navigating the  new guidelines provisions; Information on reaching out to the commission for future proposed guideline amendments.   LINKS:  United States Sentencing Guidelines online:  https://guidelines.ussc.gov/apex/r/ussc_apex/guidelinesapp/home   My new Album!  The guidelines are 40 years old, which is also when I picked up my first guitar.  So, yes, I had to give a shameless plug for my first rock record, "One Good Thing", which is available everywhere you stream your music!  Music is another creative outlet that keeps me sane and quiets my brain:   https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_kyVV0Qs1xMGqXQYZlzHzBgUlA7A35aENI   FAREWELL 2024!!!! This will be the last new episode of 2024.  As always, I wanted to thank you for listening, constributing, liking, subscribing and spreading the word about Set for Sentencing.  We have been going strong for over two years now, and the show was recently ranked #7 among the 35 “must-follow” Criminal Defense podcasts in 2024, via Feedspot (35 Best Criminal Defense Podcasts You Must Follow in 2024).  So, per a tradition I started in 2023, I'll be taking the rest of the year off!  The remaining episodes of the year will be re-broadcasts of either other podcasts I have appeared on or some earlier episodes I adore and may have been overlooked when the audience was smaller.   2025 will be a wild ride, and we'll be right here with you, buckled up and ready to roll.   Until then, I'm grateful for all of it, and I hope you find some peace, light and love as the year winds down. 

We spend so much time and engergy trying to develop our knowledge and skill to better represent our clients.  And keeping abreast of all major developments in the law is paramount to a successful legal practice. But there's one thing every lawyer needs, and it does not exist – a crystal ball.  If we were clairvoyant we could anticipate favorable changes in the law that we could use to our advantage right now, even before the ruling happens. The bigger problem, especially in federal court, is that if we enter a plea agreement (which is almost every case), we almost always waive our right to challenge changes in the law that would even prove a client is innocent of the crime to which he pled! Therefore, in an effort to aid in your clairvoyant powers on the subject of federal FRAUD cases, we give you Thompson v. United States, a “sleeper case” headed for the Supreme Court. Reading the tea leaves of prior recent court decisions on fraud crimes, the muck at the bottom of the mug tells us that if the Court continues on their quest to narrow the scope of federal fraud prosecutions, could result in a seismic shift in many cases where the fraud is predicated on the accused making “false statements. “   IN THIS EPISODE: Summary of the Thompson case; The distinction between “false statements” versus “misleading statements”; The need to make a record before, during, and after a plea; Consider negotiating a conditional plea that preserves your right to appeal should the Thompson case go our way; How long it may take to get a ruling from the court on Thompson; Plea implications of Thompson; Sentencing implications of Thompson (relevant or acquitted conduct).   AFTERTHOUGHT:   It occurred to me when editing this podcast a very important practice tip now that there is this great body of S.Ct. law limiting fraud  and cert having been granted on Thompson:  We should strongly consider asking for a “Bill of Particulars” in every case, to make the government state, with specificity what the alleged fraudulent conduct was, as if it was an omission or a misleading statement, rather than an outright LIE, then you may have a fighting chance at defeating the charge, and/or mitigating your sentence.   LINKS: Mark Allenbaugh:   www.sentencingstats.com Check back here soon for an updated link to Mark's Law 360 article on this topic!

Summary of Chapter 8: Punishment and Sentencing. Chapter 8 delves into the theories, practices, and controversies surrounding punishment and sentencing in the criminal justice system. It explores various approaches to punishment, including retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation, and examines how these theories influence sentencing decisions. Theories of Punishment: Retribution: This theory is based on the concept of just deserts, where offenders are punished because they deserve it for their wrongful acts. The punishment should be proportionate to the crime, reflecting society's need for moral balance. Deterrence: Deterrence aims to prevent future crime by making the consequences of criminal behavior clear and severe. It is divided into general deterrence, which targets society at large, and specific deterrence, which focuses on preventing the individual offender from reoffending. Rehabilitation: Rehabilitation seeks to reform offenders by addressing the underlying issues that contributed to their criminal behavior, with the goal of helping them reintegrate into society as law-abiding citizens. Sentencing Guidelines and Statutory Penalties: Sentencing Guidelines: These provide a structured approach to sentencing, aiming for consistency and fairness by outlining recommended penalties based on the severity of the offense and the defendant's criminal history. Statutory Penalties: These are the legally prescribed minimum and maximum punishments for specific crimes. Judges must impose sentences within these limits, although they may depart from the guidelines in certain circumstances, depending on aggravating or mitigating factors. Alternative Sentencing: Probation: A common form of alternative sentencing that allows offenders to remain in the community under supervision, subject to conditions such as regular check-ins with a probation officer, employment, and participation in treatment programs. Community Service: Offenders perform unpaid work for the benefit of the community as a form of restitution. This option allows offenders to contribute positively to society while avoiding incarceration. Severe Punishments: Death Penalty: Also known as capital punishment, the death penalty is reserved for the most heinous crimes. It is highly controversial and subject to strict legal standards and safeguards to ensure fairness and due process. Life Imprisonment: This involves incarcerating an offender for the rest of their life, either with or without the possibility of parole. Life imprisonment is often used as an alternative to the death penalty for serious crimes. Clemency and Commutation: Clemency: An act of mercy that can result in a pardon, reduction of the sentence, or commutation to a lesser penalty. Clemency provides a final check on the criminal justice system, allowing for mercy in exceptional cases. Commutation: A form of clemency that reduces the severity of a sentence without overturning the conviction. For example, a death sentence might be commuted to life imprisonment. This chapter provides a comprehensive overview of the philosophies and practices of punishment and sentencing, highlighting the complex considerations that underlie decisions in the criminal justice system. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Summary of Chapter 8: Punishment and Sentencing. Chapter 8 delves into the theories, practices, and controversies surrounding punishment and sentencing in the criminal justice system. It explores various approaches to punishment, including retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation, and examines how these theories influence sentencing decisions. Theories of Punishment: Retribution: This theory is based on the concept of just deserts, where offenders are punished because they deserve it for their wrongful acts. The punishment should be proportionate to the crime, reflecting society's need for moral balance. Deterrence: Deterrence aims to prevent future crime by making the consequences of criminal behavior clear and severe. It is divided into general deterrence, which targets society at large, and specific deterrence, which focuses on preventing the individual offender from reoffending. Rehabilitation: Rehabilitation seeks to reform offenders by addressing the underlying issues that contributed to their criminal behavior, with the goal of helping them reintegrate into society as law-abiding citizens. Sentencing Guidelines and Statutory Penalties: Sentencing Guidelines: These provide a structured approach to sentencing, aiming for consistency and fairness by outlining recommended penalties based on the severity of the offense and the defendant's criminal history. Statutory Penalties: These are the legally prescribed minimum and maximum punishments for specific crimes. Judges must impose sentences within these limits, although they may depart from the guidelines in certain circumstances, depending on aggravating or mitigating factors. Alternative Sentencing: Probation: A common form of alternative sentencing that allows offenders to remain in the community under supervision, subject to conditions such as regular check-ins with a probation officer, employment, and participation in treatment programs. Community Service: Offenders perform unpaid work for the benefit of the community as a form of restitution. This option allows offenders to contribute positively to society while avoiding incarceration. Severe Punishments: Death Penalty: Also known as capital punishment, the death penalty is reserved for the most heinous crimes. It is highly controversial and subject to strict legal standards and safeguards to ensure fairness and due process. Life Imprisonment: This involves incarcerating an offender for the rest of their life, either with or without the possibility of parole. Life imprisonment is often used as an alternative to the death penalty for serious crimes. Clemency and Commutation: Clemency: An act of mercy that can result in a pardon, reduction of the sentence, or commutation to a lesser penalty. Clemency provides a final check on the criminal justice system, allowing for mercy in exceptional cases. Commutation: A form of clemency that reduces the severity of a sentence without overturning the conviction. For example, a death sentence might be commuted to life imprisonment. This chapter provides a comprehensive overview of the philosophies and practices of punishment and sentencing, highlighting the complex considerations that underlie decisions in the criminal justice system. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Summary of Chapter 8: Punishment and Sentencing. Chapter 8 delves into the theories, practices, and controversies surrounding punishment and sentencing in the criminal justice system. It explores various approaches to punishment, including retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation, and examines how these theories influence sentencing decisions. Theories of Punishment: Retribution: This theory is based on the concept of just deserts, where offenders are punished because they deserve it for their wrongful acts. The punishment should be proportionate to the crime, reflecting society's need for moral balance. Deterrence: Deterrence aims to prevent future crime by making the consequences of criminal behavior clear and severe. It is divided into general deterrence, which targets society at large, and specific deterrence, which focuses on preventing the individual offender from reoffending. Rehabilitation: Rehabilitation seeks to reform offenders by addressing the underlying issues that contributed to their criminal behavior, with the goal of helping them reintegrate into society as law-abiding citizens. Sentencing Guidelines and Statutory Penalties: Sentencing Guidelines: These provide a structured approach to sentencing, aiming for consistency and fairness by outlining recommended penalties based on the severity of the offense and the defendant's criminal history. Statutory Penalties: These are the legally prescribed minimum and maximum punishments for specific crimes. Judges must impose sentences within these limits, although they may depart from the guidelines in certain circumstances, depending on aggravating or mitigating factors. Alternative Sentencing: Probation: A common form of alternative sentencing that allows offenders to remain in the community under supervision, subject to conditions such as regular check-ins with a probation officer, employment, and participation in treatment programs. Community Service: Offenders perform unpaid work for the benefit of the community as a form of restitution. This option allows offenders to contribute positively to society while avoiding incarceration. Severe Punishments: Death Penalty: Also known as capital punishment, the death penalty is reserved for the most heinous crimes. It is highly controversial and subject to strict legal standards and safeguards to ensure fairness and due process. Life Imprisonment: This involves incarcerating an offender for the rest of their life, either with or without the possibility of parole. Life imprisonment is often used as an alternative to the death penalty for serious crimes. Clemency and Commutation: Clemency: An act of mercy that can result in a pardon, reduction of the sentence, or commutation to a lesser penalty. Clemency provides a final check on the criminal justice system, allowing for mercy in exceptional cases. Commutation: A form of clemency that reduces the severity of a sentence without overturning the conviction. For example, a death sentence might be commuted to life imprisonment. This chapter provides a comprehensive overview of the philosophies and practices of punishment and sentencing, highlighting the complex considerations that underlie decisions in the criminal justice system. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

The recent case of a senior citizen sentenced to imprisonment for petty theft has raised questions about sentencing practices in Malaysia. We discuss what judges take into account when deciding a sentence and the state of access to justice in our legal system with lawyer Edmund Bon.Image Credit: Shutterstock.com

Last Thursday, Judge Lewis Kaplan sentenced Sam Bankman-Fried to 25 years in prison.  Some think that's an appropriate result.  Some think it should have been more. But this sentence far more than necessary to meet the goals of sentencing.  The bigger problem is, there were likely missed opportunities to convince the Judge that justice demanded a lower sentence for Sam.  Therefore, here is the straight scoop on SBF's sentencing (we have the full transcript) and the larger problems it reveals about federal sentencing and beyond.   IN THIS EPISODE:   Judge Kaplan's “tip of the cap” to the insurrectionists; The missed opportunity to present powerful sentencing statistics, including average federal sentences for murder, kidnaping, sexual abuse, and child pornography; Judge Kaplan's explicit comments regarding broken guidelines; Autism Spectrum Disorder – the (largely ignored) elephant in the room; SBF's sentence compared to  (spoiler alert, his sentence is HIGHER than all of ‘em); The missed opportunity of highlighting a LIFE EXPECTANCY analysis at sentencing; The missed opportunity to tell the story of BOP classification issues;   LINKS:   Ep. 73: Sam Bankman-Fried: Is Autism the Missing Piece of Mitigation? https://youtu.be/jkh6eEkvBRg?si=qXJxNu4SBKCqTWEq    

What better way to start off the new year than to review some of the big guideline changes that took effect at the end of the year, and some forward looking sentencing commission proposals for changes that could be coming in 2024? We kick off this year with our friend and colleague, guidelines and sentencing stats guru, Mark Allenbaugh.  He's drinking coke, I'm sipping Don Rico tequila.   IN THIS EPISODE:   Some major changes we gave short-shrift to in previous episodes, including the 3rd point for acceptance of responsibility, and changes to status points related to criminal history, and changes to the “safety valve provision”; The need for aggressive pre-trial litigation, and now without fear of losing the 3rd point; Newly proposed amendment pertaining to “acquitted conduct”; Newly proposed amendment moving “intended loss” into text of guideline, thereby resolving the issue created by Kisor v. Wilkie; Newly proposed amendment related to “criterion 10” of the Zero Point Offender guideline (ZIPPO), and the need to reach out to the commission to oppose this; Doug's plans to publish his book on mitigation videos in 2024.   CONTACT THE SENTENCING COMMISSION (OR YOUR CONGRESSPEOPLE) ABOUT PROPOSED GUIDELINE AMENDMENTS: We spent a fair amount of time on the proposed changes to the new Zero Point Offender provision, in particular, the Commissions stated desire to amend the guideline to clarify the leader/organizer exclusion.  There is NO EMPIRACAL evidence to support the claim that those who participated in a conspiracy and had an enhanced role in the crime are prone to recidivism!  You can find all proposed amendments here: https://www.ussc.gov/guidelines/amendments/proposed-2024-amendments-federal-sentencing-guidelines For some proposed language to include in your correspondence, this is the gist of our argument: The proposed amendment to criterion 10 to place the “continuing criminal enterprise” language into a separate criterion is not a “technical” amendment.  It would presumably preclude any offender who received an upward adjustment under 3B1.1 from receiving the new downward adjustment under 4C1.1.  The commission prides itself on making data/empiracally based adjustments to the guidelines.  However, the Commission has cited no empirical evidence to support such a broad exclusionary criterion.  Moreover, given the significant litigation that already has ensured regarding both the prospective and retrospective application of 4C1.1, any amendments now will cause further confusion over application of USSG 4C1.1.  As the Commission itself has indicated, criterion 10 (in its current form) is taken from the fourth prong of the safety valve at 18 USC 3553(f)(4).  Courts have interpreted 18 USC 3553(f)(4) to exclude from the safety valve only management-level drug traffickers, i.e., only those engaged in a “continuing series” of drug offenses “from which such person obtains substantial income or resources.” 21 USC 848(c)(2).  Excluding such individuals from receiving the Zero Point Offender adjustment makes sense inasmuch as such offenders are, by definition, recidivists.  However, the Commission created 4C1.1 to address the fact that those with zero criminal history points have significantly lower rates of recidivism than those with even a single point.  As there is no evidence to suggest that an offender that otherwise meets all the 4C1.1 criteria presents a substantial risk of recidivism merely because the offender received an adjustment under 3B1.1, the Commission should decline to make further amendments to the criteria at 4C1.1 at this time. Readers may submit their comments to the Commission on or before February 22, 2024 here: https://comment.ussc.gov/apex/r/ussc_apex/publiccomment/home   LINKS TO OTHER RELEVANT SET FOR SENTENCING EPISODES: Ep. 36: Presumed Guilty: Using Acquitted, Dismissed, and Uncharged Conduct to Increase Sentences: https://youtu.be/93dOQ76t7tw?si=jx1_CFV2P8JnITt8 Ep. 65: Acquitted Conduct Revisited: Mmmmm... Flavors of Evil: https://youtu.be/iRG6cbZ_YCY?si=5tOVXg2QWKES--Js Ep. 72: Imperfect 10: Why thousands will be deemed ineligible for the ZPO and what to do about it: https://youtu.be/amEXfhgMpa8?si=jEJ_W9fiGvRCDKis   Last, but not least, the wonderful tequila I was sipping in this episode, is Don Rico (Don Rico Tequila | ¡Ay Qué Rico! | Austin, Texas (ayquerico.com))  I don't get compensated for these endorsements.  I just love talking about (and sipping) great tequila!  The cool thing about Don Rico, besides it being delicious and confirmed additive free on Tequila Matchmaker, is that the company was started by a fellow lawyer, Rick Olivo.  Rick represented a major brand, fell in love with tequila, and started his own brand.   It's not yet available in every state, but hopefully it will be soon.  

David DePape did something terrible, breaking into the San Franscisco home of Nancy and Paul Pelosi, attempting to Kidnap the former Speaker of the House, and savagely attacking her husband with a hammer.  He was just convicted in federal court for his crimes, with more to come in state court.   He is more than just his crimes.  But sadly, the likely truth of DePape's mitigation story has yet to be, and may never be fully told.  So let's get set for sentencing with Doug Passon and Mark Allenbaugh!   IN THIS EPISODE:    Sentencing guidelines discussion; Why DePape faces an almost certain life sentence; DePape's  potential incarceration location; The ongoing terrible dysfunction of the Federal Bureau of Prisons; Discussing DePape's possible mental health issues and why they have not yet come into play; The BOP's inadequacy providing mental health (or any health) treatment.   LINKS: We talked about data Mark obtain from the Judicial Sentencing INformation database, or "JSIN".  We did a podcast on this a while back: https://setforsentencing.com/podcast/jsin-will-judicial-sentencing-information-mutilate-the-stats-or-slash-sentences/   Doug mentioned that the crimes here were very similar to that of the plot to kidnap the govenerner of Michigan (Gretchen Whitmer) and livestream her "trial".  The difference here, at least as it comes to defendant Ty Garbin, was that Mr. Garbin came to understood how wrong his beliefs and conduct were, and went to great lengths to atone for his crimes.  As such, unlike his co-defendants who went to trial and fought to the bitter end, he received a very lenient sentence.  The same fate does not await Mr. DePape, who also is still unfortunately unyeildingly entrenched in his conspiracy theories. If you'd like to see the sentencing mitigation video Doug Passon produced for Mr. Garbin's case, his lawyers made it available here:  https://youtu.be/AOhOY3uuvRQ?si=AOxezRfKx-0bYkfX   Lastly, Doug mentioned a case involving a client with Delusional Disorder.  He litigated that case with an extraordinary attorney by the name of Donna Elm.  Donna and Doug did a podcast on this subject a while back.  Take a listen! https://setforsentencing.com/podcast/rotting-with-your-rights-on-indefinite-detention-for-incompetent-clients/

The day after Halloween, all of the proposed guideline changes went into effect!  We've talked about many of them in detail on previous podcasts, but here, we do a quick run-through of all eigiht categories of amendments.  So what's in our candy bags the day after?  Well, in truth, most of what we got were TREATS, but we have a few TRICKS as well.   There's plenty to love here, but there are also a few catagories of offenses that could result in increased guideline calculations.   Helping us get Set for Sentencing, our returning champion, guidelines guru Mark Allenbaugh to help run through all of it.    IN THIS EPISODE: The EIGHT categories of guidelines changes that went into effect on 11/1/23 Some practical tips and tricks for dealing with them:  Compassionate release (treat) Criminal History (treat) Acceptance of Responsibility (treat) New enhancement under the firearms guideline (trick) Career Offender guidelines (trick) Safety Valve (treat, but a lame circus peanut cleanup treat) Fentanyl enhancement (another weak treat) Sexual Abuse of a Ward Enhancement (it's a trick for the staff of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, who seem to have a sexual abuse problem in their facilities, and most definitely a treat for their many victims.) Why the commission is starting to move “commentary” into the guideline itself, in order to bypass new law (Kisor) that renders commentary non-binding on judges. If you have a case involving INTENDED LOSS under the fraud guidelines, be aware of the Kisor argument that gives you a solid argument (in some circuits) that there's no such thing as “intended loss”; The connection between the Sexual Abuse of a Ward enhancement and the new expanded grounds for Compassionate release, and some practical tips for inmates who are victims of abuse in prison.   OTHER PODCAST EPISODES WORTH CHECKING OUT:   IMPERFECT 10 - Beware criterion 10 of the Zero Point Offender provision that seems to preclude the 2-level reduction where a person previously received a "role enhancment".  Don't give up so easily on this issue! https://setforsentencing.com/podcast/imperfect10/   GOIN' RETRO:  RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF ZERO POINT OFFENDER AMENDMENT: https://setforsentencing.com/podcast/goin-retro-retroactive-application-of-zpo-and-status-point-amendments/   The First ZERO POINT OFFENDER PODCAST:  THE ZIPPO IS ON FIRE! https://setforsentencing.com/podcast/zippo/

The "safety valve" provision of the federal sentencing statute requires a district court to ignore any statutory mandatory minimum and instead follow the Sentencing Guidelines if a defendant was convicted of certain nonviolent drug crimes and can meet five sets of criteria. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(1)-(5). Congress amended the first set of criteria, in§ 3553(f)(1), in the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, § 402, 132 Stat. 5194, 5221, broad criminal justice and sentencing reform legislation designed to provide a second chance for nonviolent offenders. A defendant satisfies § 3553(f)(1), as amended, if he "does not have-(A) more than 4 criminal history points, excluding any criminal history points resulting from a 1-point offense, as determined under the sentencing guidelines; (B) a prior 3-point offense, as determined under the sentencing guidelines; and (C) a prior 2-point violent offense, as determined under the sentencing guidelines." 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(1) (emphasis added). The question presented is whether the "and" in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(1) means "and," so that a defendant satisfies the provision so long as he does not have (A) more than 4 criminal history points, (B) a 3-point offense, and (C) a 2-point offense (as the Ninth Circuit holds), or whether the "and" means "or," so that a defendant satisfies the provision so long as he does not have (A) more than 4 criminal history points, (B) a 3- point offense, or (C) a 2-point violent offense (as the Seventh and Eighth Circuits hold). ORDER OF 10/2/2023: THE MOTION OF PETITIONER FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED FURTHER HEREIN IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL IS GRANTED. J. ROBERT BLACK, OF OMAHA, NEBRASKA, IS APPOINTED TO SERVE AS COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER IN THIS CASE.

On this episode, Nina and Joe have a discussion with Jim Felman on the United States' sentencing guidelines. 

The Zero Point Offender and Status Point modifications to the Sentencing Guidelines go into effect on November 1.  They are RETROACTIVE.  But not everyone knows whether they may benefit from the changes or how to go about getting that benefit.  Therefore, helping us get Set for Sentencing, Mark Allenbaugh, and Keith Hilzendeger to tell us everything you everything you need to know.  This episode is for those who have resources to engage private counsel to fight this fight, or for those who may need help from the Federal Public Defender.  Either way, change is coming, and we must be ready.   IN THIS EPISODE: PART ONE:  MARK ALLENBAUGH Overview of the “ZIPPO”, or ZERO POINT OFFENDER guideline amendment; Overview of the “status points” adjustment changes; Retroactivity and the February 1, 2024 target date; DO NOT WAIT until 11/1 to ask for these 2 levels off or, consider asking for a continuance until the amendment goes into effect! Using compassionate release motions to effectuate the change on the grounds that if you are immediately eligible for release, you shouldn't have to wait until February 1, 2024; Covid is still a thing, and why it matters to Zippo motions; What to do if your sentencing is set before the changes take effect (11/1/23).   PART TWO:  KEITH HILZENDEGER, ASST. FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER Advice for clients who cannot afford to hire counsel to deal with Zippo/Status Point changes.   LINKS:    For an overview of the Zero Point Offender (ZIPPO) amendment, check out episode, ___ where we go into all the basics. https://setforsentencing.com/podcast/zippo/      

Everyone is talking about the latest Trump indictment.  But nobody is talking about the possible sentence he might face if convicted.  That's what we do!  Spoiler alert -- it's a big deal.

It's time to clear the docket! This week, it's officially Summertime Funtime in the Court of Judge John Hodgman! Judge Hodgman is back in Maine at the solar-powered studios of WERU with Joel Mann. Summertime Funtime Guest Bailiff Monte Belmonte (New England Public Media) is sitting in for Jesse Thorn. And, we've got word and grammar disputes to discuss with Merriam-Webster's own Emily Brewster. Can you dance with the person what brought you? Is saying UPMOST the UTMOST in wrongness? And what sound do French dogs make? Listen for the answers to these questions and more! 

Happy Fourth of July Week! Josh and Sara and I will be back to breaking news next week. For now, enjoy this deep dive special episode about how to be a critical consumer of legal news, and hear a useful explainer of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines — helpful for anyone who has ever read the words "they face a maximum of __ years in prison."Visit serioustrouble.show to see notes about this epsiode, including a transcript, and we welcome you to support our podcast for $6/month or $60/year there. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.serioustrouble.show/subscribe

We've talked at length about Trump's exposure in the documents/obstruction case now charged in Florida.  But, nobody has been talking much about the co-defendant; Trumps “body man”, Waltine Nauta.  What's his exposure?  What's his incentive to plead guilty or testify against Trump?  What is his mitigation story?  Therefore, in order to be fully Set For Sentencing on this case, we gotta talk about the other guy along for this ride.   IN THIS EPISODE:   Sentencing guidelines for Trump's Co-defendant; Why the talking heads are getting it wrong on Trump's guidelines; Analysis under 18 USC 3553 to begin to more accurately predict the outcome; The double edged sword of mitigation, in this case his history of military service; Predictions as to whether he will “flip” and cooperate against Trump; The low down on Judge Aileen Cannon; Whether judges really care about getting reversed on appeal; Thoughts about what the Department of Justice looks like if Trump gets re-elected; How all the undermining of trust in the FBI and DOJ will result in more acquittals.   RELATED LINKS:   Reality Check: Unpacking the Trump Indictment:  https://dougpassonlaw.com/podcast/realitycheck/   Mar-a-la-Going To Prison?  https://dougpassonlaw.com/podcast/mar-a-lago-ing-to-prison-worst-case-scenarios-if-djt-ends-up-in-the-bop/

Casanova 2x Sister Speaks on His Sentencing Guidelines and Casanova Wire Tap Being in Taxstone Case --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/dotcc/support

Yes, we came up with a pithy name we are sure will catch on for the new and VERY consequential US sentencing guideline amendment which allows a 2-level reduction for those with zero criminal history points and who aren't excluded based on several listed criterion.   This amendment is a BIG DEAL, and will be retroactive, potentially impacting thousands of inmates in the BOP, and countless clients currently facting sentencing in federal court.  But, some of the language is ambiguious and you must arm yourself with the right legal ammunition and also remember to preserve the issue for appeal.  To that end, bear with as, as we go waaay into the legal weeds by engaging in a mind-numbing conversation about whether “and” really means “and” as it appears in criterion 10 (leader/organizer exclusion) of the new  “ZIPPO” guideline exclusion provisions.  Necessary as this is, it's exactly the kind of mental masturbation that gives me flashbacks to LSATs and law school final exams and makes me wanna throw up in my mouth.  So, to compensate, I barfed up a dumb song about the whole thing.  If you make it past the end credits, you'll hear my debut musical performance on this podcast.  As Maximus Decimus Meridius famously says, "ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED???!!!". Yes, this might be the moment where you say Set For Sentencing officially jumped the shark.  I can live with that.   IN THIS EPISODE:   Overview of the “ZIPPO”, or ZERO POINT OFFENDER guideline amendment; Retroactivity means over 7000 people in BOP will likely be given sentencing reductions; The sticky wicket that is Criterion 10 – does “and” mean “and” or does “and” mean “or”? How you can take advantage of this amendment before it inevitably passes on 11/1/23; The Pulsifer case pending at the supreme court may resolve the criterion 10 dilemma (whether and means or); Do not forget to preserve these issues at sentencing; Even if your court finds “and” means “or” – you can still argue for a variance; DO NOT WAIT until 11/1 to ask for these 2 levels off or, consider asking for a continuance until the amendment goes into effect; Doug's dumb ZIPPO song.   OTHER LINKS: We did a general podcast on all of the major new guideline amendments.  We zeroed in on the ZIPPO here b/c it's so important, but if you want a broader view, check out this ep: https://dougpassonlaw.com/podcast/big-guideline-changes-on-the-horizon-with-mark-allenbaugh/  

Welcome to the award-winning FCPA Compliance Report, the longest running podcast in compliance. In the latest episode of the FCPA Compliance Report, host Tom Fox welcomes Katherine Pappas, Lauren Briggerman and Ian Herbert, experts in government and internal investigations at the law firm of Miller & Chevalier. The group discusses changes to the Corporate Enforcement Policy and the challenges companies face with extraordinary cooperation and clawbacks. They also dive into the Biden administration's antitrust policies, particularly in the area of labor markets and the recent trend of the DOJ losing no poach cases to juries. The conversation then shifts to the FTC's proposed rule on non-compete agreements and recent FCPA individual prosecutions related to bribery allegations. Finally, the hosts discuss potential changes to duty of oversight requirements for company directors and officers and potential changes to US sentencing guidelines. Don't miss out on this informative and engaging episode!. Key Highlights ·      Updates on DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy ·      Challenges and Failures in Antitrust Prosecutions ·      No-poach and non-compete agreements in energy industry ·      FTC Rulemaking and Non-Compete Agreements ·      Cryptocurrency and High-Profile Nondisclosure Cases ·      Oversight and Sentencing Guidelines in Companies  Resources Miller & Chevalier Executives At Risk Winter: 2022/2023 Lauren Briggerman Katherine Pappas Ian Herbert Tom Fox Instagram Facebook YouTube Twitter LinkedIn Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Silicon Valley Bank Bailout On March 10, 2023, Silicon Valley Bank failed, being the second-largest bank failure in U.S. history. The U.S. government then took extraordinary steps to stop the potential banking crisis, assuring all depositors that they could access all their money quickly, even as another major bank was shut down. Vec and Mark discuss the bailout at Silicon Valley Bank. NCLA Comment Encourages Sentencing Commission to Alleviate Harms Inflicted by Judicial Deference NCLA has filed a Comment partially supporting the United States Sentencing Commission's proposed amendments to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. The amendments would address circuit conflicts that have emerged regarding two inchoate offenses. NCLA sees the amendments as a first step to alleviating harm that Stinson deference inflicts. Still, federal judges must stop deferring to Guidelines commentary, because unlike the Guidelines themselves, the Commission's commentary never receives an up-or-down vote from Congress. NCLA Litigation Counsel Kara Rollins joins to talk through NCLA's recent Comment filed with the U.S. Sentencing Commission.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It was a long wacky December in the world of federal sentencing. I can't remember a month with more high profile proceedings, and Mark Allenbaugh (www.sentencingstats.com) and I covered all of it in a marathon, 4-hour session. Here is part 3, dissecting the sentencings of Julie and Todd Chrisley, the star of USA Network's reality shitshow, "Chrisley Knows Best." This husband and wife duo were convicted after trial of multiple fraud charges. After a lackluster performance from the defense, Todd received a 12-year sentence, his wife received 7.  So, what went wrong? IN THIS EPISODE: Gender disparity in federal sentencing; Yet another missed opportunity to argue life expectancy; Explaining the very basics of sentencing memos; Why the defense memos were among the worst we've seen; How and why the power of story lies in the details; Remembering Rodney King and Stacey Coon!? – if you are still talking about your case being outside of the “heartland”, you're 20 years behind schedule; The ongoing saga of the sentencing letter. LINKS: Last episode:  We started this conversation in EP. #31 (Sunny Balwani Sentencing Post Mortem) by doing comparative statistical analysis of Avenatti's sentencing with Holmes, Bulwani and the Chrisleys.  If you haven't heard the first 20 or so minutes of that episode, it's most certainly pertinent to today's discussion on Avenatti.   Check it out at: www.setforsentencing.com/balwani Patterson study: we can't stress this enough. Unless the crime is beyond atrocious, most judges will think long and hard before imposing a sentencing they believe will result in a defacto life sentence.  Therefore, life expectancy could make a huge impact at sententencing.  But do it right, using this study showing that life expectancy for incarcerated individuals is far different:  https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.301148  We talk about the importance of telling a story with detail and making it relevant to punishment, using Mr. Chrisley's “fibromyalgia” as the prime example.  The defense informed the judge of his diagnosis yet said nothing of symptoms and how it would affect him in prison.  Another huge opportunity missed.  If you'd like to know more about Telling the story of prison, check out EP.  3, with prison expert and former warden, Maureen Baird.  https://youtu.be/fCls6d1pzuA  

Welcome to the award-winning FCPA Compliance Report, the longest running podcast in compliance. In this special episode, I visit with Eric Morehead, the Director of Advisory Services at LRN. We discuss the US Sentencing Guidelines on the 30th anniversary of their enactment and review the recent report on the history of the Sentencing Guidelines. Morehead, a former staff attorney at the US Sentencing Commissions takes a look at the numbers and considers the broader impact of the Sentencing Guidelines on compliance in the US and across the globe. Some of the highlights include: ·      What are  the US Sentencing Guidelines? ·      Why were the enacted? ·      How have they been supported by the DOJ and Courts? ·      What were the two amendments to the US Sentencing Guidelines? ·      What may be down the road for the US Sentencing Guidelines?  Resources LRN Eric Morehead on LinkedIn A Deep Dive Into Organizational Sentencing Data by Eric Morehead on Law360 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Watch this episode on YOUTUBE, on APPLE PODCASTS, or wherever you get your podcasts! We like to say the United States has "the greatest system in the world."  But do we?  There's simply no way to answer that question until we learn how other countries adjudicate crime.  Helping us get Set for Sentencing is Prof. Julian Roberts, a British scholar, sentencing expert, and Executive Dir. of The Sentencing Academy, UK, dedicated to developing expert and public understanding of sentencing in England and Wales. IN THIS EPISODE: The UK's criminal process from charge to sentencing; Why plea bargaining is rare in the UK system; The prevalence of pre-trial detention in the UK; Why non-lawyer magistrates impose 95 percent of sentences in the UK; The length of sentences in the US vs. in the UK; Whether mandatory minimums are a thing in the UK; The history and structure of sentencing guidelines in the U.K.; Application of an case example to illustrate the UK guidelines; Use of sentencing letters, witnesses, victim impact statements and sentencing videos; The catch-22 of “Indeterminate sentences for public protection”; The prevalence of life without parole or “whole life orders” in the UK; Separate sentencing regimes for juveniles, young adults and adults; LINKS:  The Sentencing Academy, UK

Amended Complaint Filed in NCLA Gov't Censorship Lawsuit NCLA, the Attorney General of Missouri, and the Attorney General of Louisiana, have filed a second amended complaint in the lawsuit that exposed scores of federal officials across at least eleven federal agencies secretly communicating with social-media platforms to censor and suppress private speech the government disfavors. 47 new defendants, including officials from the White House, Centers for Disease Control, the FBI and 11 other federal agencies have been added to a lawsuit. Plaintiffs are also seeking to depose many of these top-ranking officials. Vec discusses Missouri v. Biden and the recently filed amended complaint with NCLA Litigation Counsel Jenin Younes. NCLA Amicus Brief Encourages Fifth Cir. to Reject Judicial Deference to Sentencing Commission NCLA has filed an amicus brief in United States v. Vargas, urging the en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to decide that Stinson deference should not be applied when it results in a more severe criminal sentence. NCLA argues that existing Fifth Circuit precedent, which the panel was bound to apply in its vacated decision, follows flawed reasoning and causes courts to defer reflexively to United States Sentencing Commission commentary, even when Sentencing Guidelines are unambiguous. Vec discusses Stinson deference and NCLA's amicus brief in U.S. v. Vargas with NCLA Litigation Counsel Kara Rollins.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

For the first time in nearly four years, there is a fully staffed, fully functioning United States Sentencing Guidelines Commission.  They have published a list of priorities for the 2022-23 cycle and are soliciting public comments until Oct. 17, 2022.  But many may not realize just how consequentional some of the proposed changes could be.  Therefore, helping us get Set For Sentencing, in an unprecedented double header, our returning champion, Mark Allenbaugh of Sentencingstats.com! IN THIS EPISODE: federal sentencing guidelines overview; The inside scoop on the commission; The need to expand arguments for early release; Congress's role in directing or ratifying guideline amendments; How the guidelines account for past criminal history and proposed amendments to those provisions; Revisiting the Commission's original mandate to avoid custodial sentences when possible for all non-violent offenders; The one sentencing statute (besides 3553) that every federal defendant must invoke as often as possible, How guideline amendments can help fix overcrowding; It's time to stop courts from using acquitted conduct against a client at sentencing; Things not on the Commission's priority list that should be; Last but not least – what can YOU DO to make your voice heard (see link below). LINKS: FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE OF PROPOSED 2022-2023 PRIORITIES SUMMARY: As part of its statutory authority and responsibility to analyze sentencing issues, including operation of the federal sentencing guidelines, and in accordance with Rule 5.2 of its Rules of Practice and Procedure, the United States Sentencing Commission is seeking comment on possible policy priorities for the amendment cycle ending May 1, 2023. DATES: Public comment should be received by the Commission on or before October 17, 2022. ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to the Commission by electronic mail or regular mail. The email address is pubaffairs@ussc.gov(link sends e-mail). The regular mail address is United States Sentencing Commission, One Columbus Circle, NE, Suite 2 500, South Lobby, Washington, DC 20002 8002, Attention: Public Affairs – Priorities Comment.

By Adam Turteltaub The Organizational Sentencing Guidelines have turned thirty, and what began as an experiment is now an established framework for compliance programs in the US and around the globe. To commemorate the milestone, the United States Sentencing Commission has published The Organizational Sentencing Guidelines: Thirty Years of Innovation and Influence, which takes a look at the impact of the guidelines and what we have learned about their impact on organizational behavior. In this podcast, the Commission's General Counsel Kathleen Grilli identifies the three largest innovations of the Guidelines: Incentivizing self-policing by organizations Providing guidance on effective ethics and compliance programs Holding organizations accountable based on specific culpability factors when they commit offenses The approach has worked more successfully than had been imagined. As she notes, it has expanded beyond the criminal environment to encompass civil settlements with government agencies as well. In addition, the approach to compliance in the Guidelines has been embraced globally, with their outlines clearly visible in the laws of many nations. Within the US, she shares, a strong difference has emerged between organizations with and without compliance programs. The overwhelming majority of organizations convicted had no compliance program at all. In fact, only 11 out of approximately 5,000 organizations had a program that a court found to be effective. This points out that there is still room for improvement, particularly among smaller organizations who lack awareness of the need for and benefits of compliance programs. Listen in to learn more about the remarkable effectiveness of the Organizational Sentencing Guidelines.

We are all still reeling from the monumental events at Mar-a-Lago last week.  Everyone is presumed INNOCENT until proven guilty and there's still so much we don't know about what's going on. But the search and seizure of the former president's residence is unprecedented &  historic. Therefore, it's important to consider the potentially monumental sentencing possibilities if Trump is convicted of the crimes enumerated in the search warrant. Helping us get Set For Sentencing, a returning champion to the podcast, sentencing guidelines expert, Mark Allenbaugh.  In this episode, Mark and Doug discuss these fundamental questions:  How much prison time would Trump potentially face for the charges listed in the search warrant; Could he be held in custody while awaiting trial; What arguments might be made for and against him at sentencing; Where might he spend his time in custody should he be sentenced; What would the conditions of confinement be in prison (spoiler alert - if you think he's going to a "country club", think again). LINKS: As always, if you want to know more about Mark, go to www.sentencingstats.com  

Helping us get Set for Sentencing this week, an amazing human who happens to be not only a former client, but also the subject of the first full-on sentencing mitigation video ever produced in Federal Court, almost twenty years ago!  I am so grateful that Dustin Arnold agreed to share his incredible journey from gifted student to deep addiction, from arrest to sentencing, and from rehabilitation to true redemption.   His story continues to inspire and amaze.  Dustin tells us what it feels like to put his fate and future in the hands of a lawyer.  He also talks about what it was like to tell his story in front of a camera for a "sentencing mitigation video".   What's a sentencing mitigation video, you ask?  Well, take a listen! We didn't know it at the time, but we were setting the wheels in motion for a completely new and powerful way to advocate.  Flash forward twenty years and the process is gaining momentum in courts all over the country.  Sentencing videos were even the subject of the Simpsons (S. 30, ep. 15, “101 Mitigations”).  So buckle up, and let's get Set For Sentencing! IN THIS EPISODE: What it feels like to be a client in the hands of a lawyer who isn't doing their job (and one who is); How the system can actually do more good then harm when the right resources and the right decision-makers are in place; Explanation of sentencing mitigation videos and how they can make all the difference in a case; A case study in why having discretionary sentencing (and a thoughtful judge) is vital; Mitigation videos are not simply for “wealthy” clients who are trying to "buy a lower sentence." This technique was born and raised in the office of the Federal Public Defender; Sentencing videos on The Simpsons?!; The seed that grew into the mighty oak – the evolution of mitigation filmmaking; Dustin's best advice, heart to heart, from a client to a lawyer; Who doesn't love a happy ending???? LINKS: The Simpsons, "101 Mitigations" Snippit of Dustin Arnold Sentencing Video FREE RESOURCE:  Doug Passon's Article from The Champion on Sentencing Mitgation Videos:  Using Moving Pictures to Build the Bridge of Empathy at Sentencing.   Click here to Download

Posted by Adam Turteltaub Being a compliance department of one can be a lonely job, but not for Susan Freccia, Director of Compliance at Oregon State University. Working in a small compliance department doesn't feel like a challenge. For one, she is not fully alone. There are compliance partners – professionals who have at least some compliance responsibilities – across the campus. More importantly, rather than focusing on her lack of a compliance team of her own she works at creating collaborative relationships far and wide. That includes the compliance partners, staff, HR, legal and audit. For others in solo situations she advises not falling into the temptation of thinking, “If only I had X or Y the compliance program could be better.” Instead, she recommends focusing on how to work effectively and continue to improve processes. She has also found success comes from the ability to help others get “unstuck” in their efforts.  She frequently meets with various individuals and teams to help figure out what the challenge is and to find a solution. She also may serve as a bridge between departments who may share responsibility in an area, helping them to collaborate more effectively. Susan also advises against seeking perfection. It's unattainable. Incidents will always occur. She notes that even the Sentencing Guidelines reflect that reality with several elements addressing how a program responds to the inevitable problems. In sum, to make a small program work, take a collaborative, problem-solving approach. It will be more effective and help people see compliance not as the cause of problems but the solutions to them.

Helping us get Set For Sentencing, Prof. Douglas Berman.  He is is the Newton D. Baker & Hostetler Chair in Law and Executive Director of the Drug Enforcement and Policy Center, housed in the Moritz College of Law of The Ohio State University. Professor Berman is the creator and author of the widely-read and widely-cited blog, Sentencing Law and Policy. The blog now receives nearly 100,000 page views per month. In this episode: What non-capital defenders can learn from looking at death penalty mitigation and trends; Making the case for jury sentencing in non-cap cases; How draconian sentencing laws and unfettered prosecutorial discretion corrupts justice and results in innocent people being compelled to plead guilty; The hope that the US Sentencing commission will institute meaningful changes to the federal sentencing guidelines; The future of compassionate release and First Step Act implementation; The debate over scrapping the guidelines vs. implementing incremental change; How to leveling the playing field by building more mitigators into the guidelines; The “one thing” that must animate all good sentencing advocacy LINKS:  Sentencing Law and Policy Blog Drug Enforcement and Policy Center 28 U.S.C. Sec. 994 (j), which essentially creates a presumption of non-incarceration for non-violent, "non-serious", first time offenders.  BUT, see these 2021 statistics from the US Sentencing Commission, showing that over NINETY PERCENT of defendants receive a PRISON sentence instead.

Get information on the Federal Sentencing Guidelines:   https://prisonprofessors.com/basics-on-us-sentencing-guidelines/

For those looking for information before sentencing, this three part series on understanding the federal sentencing guidelines may help: https://prisonprofessors.com/basics-on-us-sentencing-guidelines/    

Post By: Adam Turteltaub For most of us, it's hard to imagine a time before the US Federal sentencing Guidelines came into being and set the direction for compliance and ethics programs. Jeff Kaplan, partner at the law firm Kaplan & Walker and longtime compliance leader remembers those pre-Guidelines times and in this podcast we discuss the changes that have come, didn't happen and may yet occur with compliance programs. Even after thirty years he reports that, in many ways, we are still getting started. While many organizations have developed robust compliance programs, a large number are still at the starting gate. In addition, many business people, particularly in management, tend to think of compliance as something less than sales, marketing or other departments, and not worthy of the investment. A related challenge is what he called the “mission accomplished phenomenon”, which he defines as a tendency to see compliance as an event rather than an ongoing program. Still, he sees the glass as something more than half filled and creating new challenges. For more developed programs, he believes, now is the time to maintain a sense of urgency and improve performance. One approach he advocates for is a stronger embrace of the field of behavioral ethics. A part of social science, behavioral ethics illuminates what impacts our ethical decision-making and illuminates the biases which can lead to less than ethical decisions, even when there is intent to do the right thing. Looking to the future, he sees more work being done in the area of incentives, a struggle with Artificial Intelligence, and more nanocompliance. What is nanocompliance? Listen in to find out.

In this episode, host Bidemi Ologunde presents a case where conspiracy theories motivated an IT consultant to commit multiple cyber crimes in multiple states.Please send questions, comments, and suggestions to bidemi@thebidpicture.com. You can also get in touch on LinkedIn, Twitter, the Clubhouse app (@bid), and the Wisdom app (@bidemi).