Skip to content
Version 1.0.0
Sentencing Law and Policy
Part of the Law Professor Blogs Network

More interesting tales of tough post-Booker sentencings

By Douglas Berman
January 28, 2005

Once again, the papers are filled with interesting accounts of federal sentencings in the wake of Booker (some prior stories are recounted in this post).  And, once again, these accounts provide little basis for anyone to fear that federal judges are consistently using their new discretion to “go soft” on federal offenders:

  • This article from Pennsylvania details at length the sentencing by US District Judge James Knoll Gardner in a fraud case.  According to the article, the applicable guideline range was calculated to be 46-57 months imprisonment, and the federal prosecutor was urging a sentence at the top of the range and the defense was urging a sentence at the bottom.  But Judge Gardner went his own way and imposed a sentence of 84 months!   (Of course, as detailed in this post, I am not sure due process principles readily permit such a post-Booker sentence increase based on pre-Booker conduct.)
  • Similarly, this article from Colorado reports on a fraud sentencing in which the guidelines apparently provided for a maximum of 41 months, but the federal judge imposed a sentence of 60 months.
  • This article from Illinois reports on a bank fraud defendant being sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment by  US District Court Judge Michael McCuskey.  According to the article, 15 months was the sentence recommended by the federal prosecutor whereas the defense was urging a sentence of only 4 months.
  • This article about a New Jersey fraud case reports on significant prison terms handed out by US District Judge Harold Ackerman to many defendants, and also indicates that one defendant was given a sentence “10 months longer than the maximum suggested by federal sentencing guidelines.”
  • And this article about another New Jersey fraud case indicates that US District Judge William Walls “brushed aside the large number of letters written by [the defendants] friends, business associates and employees that requested leniency” to impose a guideline sentence of 24 months’ imprisonment.