UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION

 August 2010

Federal Sentencing Data and

Analysis Issues

by Christine Kitchens, M.A.

Senior Research Associate

Office of Research and Data

This paper explains the way in which the

United States Sentencing Commission collects

sentencing information, and discusses analytical

issues that may arise when using the

Commission’s sentencing data.1

 This paper also

describes some of the key sentencing variables

collected in the Commission’s individual offender

datafile. 

 To conduct its research and data

activities, the Commission relies on sentencing

documents submitted by the courts. Within 30

days after entry of judgment in a federal criminal

case, the chief judge of the district is required by

statute to ensure the Commission is provided

copies of (1) the judgment and commitment

order (J&C); (2) a written statement of reasons

(SOR) for the sentence imposed; (3) any plea

agreement; (4) the indictment or other charging

document; (5) the presentence report (PSR); and

(6) any other information the Commission finds

appropriate.2

 During fiscal year 2009, the federal

courts submitted to the Commission 81,372

cases, consisting of 374,922 documents.3

The J&C contains information about the

offender’s sentence (e.g., the length and type of

the sentence imposed). If the offender received

a term of imprisonment, the J&C also states

whether the offender received a period of

supervised release after incarceration, and, if so,

the length of supervision. Monetary aspects of

the sentence such as fines, restitution, and

special assessment fees are also set forth in the

J&C. The Commission collects all of this

sentencing information from every J&C form

submitted to the Commission. 

In the federal criminal justice system, the

recommended length of an offender’s sentence

is determined by the sentencing table set forth in

the Guidelines Manual.

4

 The sentencing table is

a grid with a vertical axis corresponding to the

offender’s final offense level (ranging from one to

43) and a horizontal axis reflecting the offender’s

criminal history category (ranging from I to VI). 

Once the offender’s final offense level and

criminal history category have been determined,

the court finds the intersection of those two axes

on the sentencing table at which is located a cell

containing a recommended sentencing range.5

 

Each cell in the sentencing table is

contained inside a sentencing zone. There are

four sentencing zones, designated A to D.6

 Zone

A represents the low end of the sentencing table

and includes only sentencing ranges of zero to

six months. The court may sentence offenders

in Zone A to straight probation, one or more

alternatives to prison, a split sentence (i.e., a

sentence composed of prison and at least one

alternative form of confinement), or a term of

imprisonment only.7

 Zone B is the second lowest

portion of the sentencing table and includes

sentencing ranges from one to seven months to

six to 12 months. The court may sentence

offenders in Zone B to a sentence involving at

least one alternative form of confinement, a split

sentence, or a term of imprisonment only. Zone

C is the second highest portion of the sentencing

table and includes sentencing ranges from eight

to 14 months to ten to 16 months. The court

may sentence offenders in Zone C to a split

sentence, provided that at least one half of the

minimum term of the guideline range is served in

imprisonment. Otherwise, an offender in Zone C

must receive a sentence of imprisonment only. 

Zone D is the highest (and largest) portion of the

sentencing table and includes sentencing ranges

from 12 to 18 months to life sentences. 

Offenders in Zone D must serve all of the

RESEARCH NOTES
United States Sentencing Commission

sentence as imprisonment only. The

Commission collects the sentencing zone of

each case in a variable [ZONE] which is imputed

from the information provided about the final

guideline range on the SOR.8

 Of course, the

court may impose a sentence above or below the

applicable guideline range. If so, the

Commission records that case as outside the

applicable guideline range. 

Sentence Length

The Commission collects the length of

the term of imprisonment imposed from the J&C. 

The Commission collects this information in

several variables. The length of the term of

imprisonment imposed initially is captured in two

variables, a months variable [TOTPRISN] and a

days variable [TOTDAYS]. Additionally, the

Commission datafile has specific values that

denote special instances such as sentences of

life, less than one day in prison (i.e., hours),

unspecified length, and the death penalty.9

These values are all included in the prison

months imposed variable [TOTPRISN].10

The Commission also collects information

on the months [TIMSERVM] and days

[TIMSERVD] of time already served sentences.11

In some cases, the court will specify a sentence

of two months’ time already served, meaning that

the offender already has served the full sentence

of two months. Occasionally, the court will

simply state “Time Served” on the J&C and not

specify a sentence length. In those instances,

analysts at the Commission review the PSR to

determine the amount of time already served. In

some cases, the PSRs will report the number of

days the offender spent in custody prior to the

sentencing date. In other cases, the document

may provide the original arrest date and report

that the offender was in custody the entire time

before sentencing. In such a case, the length of

time already served can be determined by

comparing the difference between the arrest date

and the sentence date. If the amount of time

already served cannot be determined, then a

specific code is used to denote that a sentence

of time already served was given but the exact

amount is unknown.12

An offender may be sentenced for a

federal offense while in state custody for another

offense. Special rules may apply when the

conduct underlying the state offense played a

role in determining the sentence imposed for the

federal offense. These rules are discussed in

USSG §5G1.3 of the Guidelines Manual.

13 If the

court determines that the federal portion of the

offender’s sentence will run either concurrently

with, or consecutively to, the stated term of

imprisonment, the court may adjust the federal

sentence for time already served on the

undischarged term of imprisonment. The

Commission collects the presence of this type of

credit in an indicator variable14 [CH5G13YN]. 

The Commission also collects the length of credit

in months [CH5G13ST]. Occasionally, the court

will indicate on the J&C that credit is being given

to an offender under USSG §5G1.3, but the

exact amount of the credit is not specified. In

such a case, the indicator variable is “Yes,” but

the variable capturing the length of the credit

granted under USSG §5G1.3 is blank or missing

because the exact amount of time is unknown.

The Commission also collects information

about the months of alternative sentences

imposed.15 Months of home detention

[MOHOMDET], community confinement

[MOCOMCON], and intermittent confinement

[MOINTCON] are collected. Additionally

collected are any hours of community service

[HRCOMSRV] specified on the J&C as part of

the offender’s sentence. Information about an

alternative sentence is collected in the same

variables whether the alternative is a condition of

probation or supervised release.

 

In addition to the information that is

collected from the J&C, the Commission creates

some research variables to facilitate analysis. 

Additionally, other more specific indicator

variables are created to note the particular type

of alternative sentence, such as home detention

[HOMDUM], community confinement

[COMDUM], and intermittent confinement

[INTDUM]. One example is an indicator variable

that denotes the presence of an alternative

sentence [ALTDUM].

2
Federal Sentencing Data and Analysis Issues

For simplicity in reporting purposes, the

Commission creates four research sentencing

variables that describe the total sentence

imposed on an offender. Generally, the

Commission recommends that researchers use

one of these four variables because they

combine all of the separate variables for prison

imposed, time already served, USSG §5G1.3

months, alternative sentences, and probation

added together. 

The first sentencing research variable

[SENTTOT] adds together the imprisonment

days and months, including the time already

served and the months of a concurrent state

sentence (USSG §5G1.3).16 This variable does

not include any months of probation or months of

alternative confinement (i.e., if an offender

received four months of home detention only,

then the value for this variable [SENTTOT] would

be reported as blank or missing because there

was no prison involved). This sentencing

variable [SENTTOT] should be used only when

total imprisonment sentences (imposed or

already served) are of interest (e.g., when

researching the question: “What is the average

length of imprisonment for drug trafficking

offenders?”).

The second sentencing research variable

[SENTTOT0] adds together the imprisonment

days and months, including the time already

served amounts and the USSG §5G1.3 months. 

This variable does not include any months of

alternative confinement (e.g., if an offender

received four months of home detention, then the

value for this variable would be reported as

missing because there was no prison term

involved). However, sentences of probation only

are added in as zero months (e.g., an offender

who received a sentence of 12 months’ probation

only would have a value of “missing” for the

previously discussed sentencing variable

[SENTTOT] but a value of “zero” for this

sentencing field [SENTTOT0]). This sentencing

variable [SENTTOT0] should be used when a

researcher wants to include sentences of

probation only as zero months of imprisonment

when calculating sentence averages.

The third sentencing research variable

[SENSPLT] adds together the imprisonment

days and months, including the time already

served and the concurrent state sentence

months (USSG §5G1.3). This variable does

include any term of alternative confinement (e.g.,

if an offender received four months of home

detention and four months of imprisonment, then

the value for this variable [SENSPLT] would be

reported as eight months). However, sentences

of probation only are recorded as “missing” and

are not included in sentence averages. This

variable [SENSPLT] should be used when a

researcher wants to include both prison and

alternative sentences but not sentences of

probation.

The fourth sentencing research variable

[SENSPLT0] adds together the imprisonment

days and months, including the time already

served, the USSG §5G1.3 concurrent state

sentence months, and any months of alternative

confinement, and treats probation only

sentences as “zero” months. For example, if an

offender received four months of home detention

and four months of imprisonment, then the value

for this variable [SENSPLT0] is reported as eight

months. However, if an offender received four

months of probation, then this variable is

reported as zero months because only a

sentence of probation was received. This

variable [SENSPLT0] should be used when a

researcher wants to include all types of

sentences (imprisonment, alternative sentences,

and sentences of probation).

It should be noted that for all of the above

sentencing variables (i.e., [SENTTOT],

[SENTTOT0], [SENSPLT], [SENSPLT0]),

sentences of “life” are listed as 470 months. 

This number of months was calculated as the

average life expectancy for prisoners at the time

the variables were first created. By coding life

sentence cases in this way, researchers are able

to include cases with life sentences in analyses

of average sentences. In fiscal year 1999, the

Commission switched data entry software. In the

newer system, the sentence length variable was

expanded to four digits, to allow sentences of

1,000 months or more to be collected accurately. 

3
United States Sentencing Commission

As an example, the court may impose a

sentence of 1,200 months (perhaps due to

multiple counts of conviction with consecutive

statutory minimums). These values are not recoded to “life” in the Commission’s datafile, and

the individual researcher must determine if

recoding is desirable. If these values are not

recoded, then these sentences will actually

appear to be longer than the life sentences,

which are recorded as 470 months. Additionally,

these values may skew the average sentence

length upwards. Therefore, if the researcher

does not choose to recode these values, he or

she may wish to review and report both mean

and median values.

To refer to sentence types, the

Commission uses specific terminology in its

tables, charts, and reports. When Commission

documents refer to “average sentence,” usually

all of the sentence fields are included (i.e.,

[SENSPLT0] is used). However, when

Commission documents refer to “average length

of imprisonment,” usually only prison sentences

are included [SENTTOT]. Commission

documents generally describe in the footnotes

the types of sentences that are included in the

tables, clearly stating whether alternative

sentences or probation sentences are included

or excluded.

If most of the cases of interest involve

“imprisonment only” sentences (e.g., in fiscal

year 2009, 94.1% of drug trafficking cases were

sentenced to imprisonment only17), then using a

prison only sentencing variable [SENTTOT] is

probably the best choice. If the focus of the

research is on offenders who are generally in

sentencing zones that include eligibility for

alternative sentences or sentences of probation

(e.g., white collar offenders), then another

sentencing variable may be a better choice. For

example, using [SENSPLT0] would allow the

researcher to include all of the alternative

sentences and sentences of probation in the

sentence average.

The Commission collects from the J&C

the length of probation sentences [PROBATN]

and the amount of supervised release [SUPREL]

imposed at sentencing. These values are

expressed in months. Furthermore, research

variables are created from the probation and

supervised release variables to indicate the

presence of supervised release [SUPRDUM] and

probation [PROBDUM].

 The variable that indicates the

sentencing zone [ZONE] is created based on the

final offense level and criminal history category

collected in the datafile. Sentencing zone is

reported prior to any increase or decrease in the

sentence based on departure or variance. The

Commission datafile also contains a variable

[SENTIMP] that reviews the various sentencing

variables and divides cases into the categories of

prison only, prison plus alternatives, probation

plus alternatives, straight probation, and fine only

cases. The Commission has several variables

for sentencing data, so researchers are able to

tailor their analyses according to the focus of

their research. The decision of which sentence

length variable to use ultimately is up to the

individual researcher. Reviewing variables such

as the type of sentence imposed [SENTIMP] and

sentencing zone [ZONE] in the datafile may be

helpful in making the decision.18

An additional consideration when using

Commission data is the issue of sentence

imposed versus time actually served. Generally

speaking, the Sentencing Reform Act of 198419

eliminated the use of parole in the federal

criminal justice system for offenders sentenced

after November 1, 1987. A prisoner serving a

term of imprisonment of more than one year

(other than a term of life imprisonment) may

receive credit toward the service of the prisoner’s

sentence, beyond the time served, of up to 54

days at the end of each year of the prisoner’s

term of imprisonment subject to the

determination of the Bureau of Prisons.20

Because the Commission collects information

only through the sentencing phase, the

Commission does not have data on how much

good-conduct credit an offender actually accrues

while incarcerated.

4
Federal Sentencing Data and Analysis Issues

Other Types of Sentences

Any other type of sentence stated on the

J&C (e.g., denial of federal benefits, suspended

terms of imprisonment, and orders to pay the

cost of prosecution) are documented in the

“other type of sentence” indicator variable

[TYPEOTHS]. If the court imposes a sentence

other than that described in the “Sentence

Length” portion of this paper, then a value of

“other” is coded and a brief descriptive text is

supplied [TYPEOTTX]. As with all variables

collected by the Commission, the documents

submitted for an offender must contain

information about a variable for a value to be

collected. Cases with “other” types of sentences

are rare. To impose certain types of “other”

sentences, the court must attach extra pages to

the J&C and submit those to the Commission to

detail the punishment. Examples of unusual

sentences are — denial of federal benefits, a

suspended prison term, and an order to pay the

cost of prosecution. It is unclear how often these

other types of penalties are applied in cases for

which this documentation is not sent in to the

Commission. Therefore, analyses of these

unusual sentences should be approached with

caution.

Monetary Amounts

In addition to sentence length

information, details about the monetary aspects

of the offender’s sentence also are collected in

the Commission’s datafile.21 The Commission

collects information about the imposed amounts

of fines [FINE], restitution [TOTREST], the

special assessment fees [SPECASSM], and the

supervision costs [COSTSUP]. Some of these

variables are combined, or the values associated

with them are collapsed, to form special research

variables. For example, a research indicator

variable is created for the cost of supervision

[COSTSDUM] to more easily enable researchers

to identify cases in which the court requires the

offender to pay the cost of supervision by

“screening on” cases where [COSTDUM] has a

value of one. Combinations of the monetary

variables are also created. An example is the

dollar amount of the fine and cost of supervision

added together [AMTFINEC]. Another

combination is a version of restitution with values

of “some restitution given but exact amount

unknown” recoded from a specific value to

missing [AMTREST]. The Commission also

reports the dollar amount of fine, cost of

supervision, and restitution amount combined

[AMTTOTAL]. This allows researchers to

analyze easily the total amount of monetary

penalties the court imposed. Finally, the

Commission created a variable to indicate the

types of monetary punishments that were

imposed [TYPEMONY]. 

In fiscal year 2009, approximately 800

cases were submitted to the Commission in

which the court did not impose a prison

sentence, an alternative to imprisonment, or a

probationary sentence.22 In these types of

cases, the court usually imposes only monetary

penalties such as fines and special

assessments. Researchers will have to decide

how to classify these types of offenders in any

sentencing analysis. The sentence type

imposed variable [SENTIMP] identifies these

cases.

For examples of publicly released

Commission data on sentencing, see the

Sentencing Information section of the 2009

Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing Statistics. 

Questions about specific sentencing variables

and data questions generally may be directed to

the Commission at 202-502-4500 or at

askORD@ussc.gov.

5
United States Sentencing Commission

1. The United States Sentencing Commission is an independent agency in the Judicial Branch of

government. Established by the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, its principal purposes are (1) to

establish sentencing policies and practices for the federal courts, including guidelines regarding the

appropriate form and severity of punishment for offenders convicted of federal crimes; (2) to advise and

assist Congress, the Judicial Branch, and the Executive Branch in the development of effective and

efficient crime policy; and (3) to collect, analyze, research, and distribute a broad array of information on

federal crime and sentencing issues. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 991-994.

2. See 28 U.S.C. § 994(w)(1)(A)-(F). The Commission collects sentencing information only for cases in

which at least one of the counts of conviction are classified as a felony or Class A misdemeanor because

the federal sentencing guidelines do not apply to petty offenses (see United States Sentencing

Commission, Guidelines Manual, §1B1.9 (2009) (hereinafter USSG)). For more information about the

origin of the Commission’s data and the types of information that the Commission collects, see CHRISTINE

KITCHENS, INTRODUCTION TO THE COLLECTION OF INDIVIDUAL OFFENDER DATA BY THE UNITED STATES

SENTENCING COMMISSION (May 2009), available at the Commission’s website at http://www.ussc.gov.

3. See UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION, 2009 SOURCEBOOK OF FEDERAL SENTENCING STATISTICS,

Table 1 (2010) (hereinafter 2009 Sourcebook).

4. See USSG, supra note 2, at Chapter Five to view the sentencing table and to obtain more detailed

information about determining an offender’s sentence under the federal sentencing guidelines.

5. The guideline range in the sentencing table does not account for any statutory mandatory minimum or

maximum ranges that may “trump” lesser or greater guideline ranges. For more information on the ways

in which the guideline ranges and statutory ranges interact in determining the total sentence, see USSG,

supra note 2, at Chapter Five, Part G.

6. See USSG, supra note 2, at USSG §5C1.1 for more information about the types of sentences

applicable in each sentencing zone.

7. The Commission collects information about the following types of alternative confinement for inclusion

in the sentencing variables: home detention (with or without electronic monitoring), community

confinement (generally time spent in a half-way house), and intermittent confinement (generally a

specified number of weekends in jail).

8. The names given to sentencing variables are provided in this paper in capital letters.

9. The sentencing guidelines do not specifically contain any provisions including the death penalty. If a

statute of conviction includes a provision for the death penalty and the offender is ultimately sentenced to

death, then this statutory punishment is considered to have “trumped” the guideline sentence. The

special values are as follows: 9992 for less than one day in prison (i.e., a number of hours), 9996 for life

sentences, 9997 for cases in which prison was clearly ordered but the exact amount of time is unknown,

and 9998 for death penalty sentences.

10. For more information about the sentencing variables, see the Commission’s publicly available

datasets and codebook describing the length and values of the variables available at

http://fjsrc.urban.org/index.cfm or www.icpsr.umich.edu. Additional sentencing research and guideline

information can be obtained at the Commission’s website, http://www.ussc.gov.

ENDNOTES

6
Federal Sentencing Data and Analysis Issues

11. Federal offenders can be granted credit for the time spent in custody after the arrest for the instant

offense but prior to sentencing according to 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b).

12. When the court notes on the J&C “Time Served,” but the exact amount of that time the offender

already served has not been specified, then a code of “997” is entered into the time already served

months [TIMSERVM] and days [TIMSERVD] variables. 

13. For example, an offender who committed an assault or robbery with a firearm might be convicted of

that conduct in state court. If police officers found a firearm when searching the offender and determined

that he was a felon who was prohibited from possessing a firearm, that portion of the conduct from the

state offense may result in a federal conviction. See USSG, supra note 2, at USSG §5G1.3 for more

information on credit for undischarged terms of imprisonment available at

http://www.ussc.gov/guidelin.htm. 

14. For some fields, the Commission creates an indicator or “dummy” variable to indicate the presence

of whatever the variable is measuring. As an example, the indicator variable for USSG §5G1.3 credit

[CH5G13YN] will have a value of one for all cases in which the court granted credit towards the

offender’s sentence under USSG §5G1.3. When the court did not grant credit under USSG §5G1.3, the

indicator variable will have a value of zero.

15. See USSG, supra note 2, at Chapter Five for further information about the definitions of alternative

confinement and in what sentencing zones they are applicable. See also COURTNEY SEMISCH, PH.D.,

ALTERNATIVE SENTENCING IN THE FEDERAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, available at

http://www.ussc.gov/general/20090206_Alternatives.pdf for more information about alternative sentences

in the federal system. 

16. All of the Commission’s sentence length variables report sentences in terms of months. When

sentences consist of days only or as both months and days, the days are converted to a fraction of a

month. As an example, sentences of 12 months and one day are recorded as 12.03 months.

17. See 2009 Sourcebook, supra note 3, at Table 12.

18. See 2009 Sourcebook, supra note 3, at the section titled “Sentencing Information.” 

19. Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, Pub. L. No. 98–473, 98 Stat. 2019 (1987).

20. See 18 U.S.C. § 3624(b).

21. One of the monetary penalties about which the Commission does not collect information is

forfeitures. Although some courts list forfeiture statutes on the J&C, the Commission does not record

these as statutes of conviction because they do not have minimum or maximum penalties as do the other

statutes of conviction.

22. Cases that do not fit into one of the four sentencing type categories of “prison only,” “prison plus

alternatives,” “probation plus alternatives,” or “probation only” are designated with the value of zero for

the type of sentence [SENTIMP] variable. For example, in some of these cases an alternative form of

confinement is imposed, but no months of prison or probation are specified. These cases are not

designated as one of the above categories. However, most cases in the “no prison, no probation”

category are cases in which a fine is the only penalty.

7
United States Sentencing Commission

William K. Sessions III

Chair

Ruben Castillo

Vice Chair

William B. Carr, Jr.

Vice Chair

Ketanji Brown Jackson

Vice Chair

Ricardo H. Hinojosa

Commissioner

Beryl A. Howell

Commissioner

Dabney L. Friedrich

Commissioner

Isaac Fulwood, Jr.

Ex Officio

Jonathan J. Wroblewski

Ex Officio

Judith W. Sheon

Staff Director

Glenn R. Schmitt

Director

Office of Research and Data

Louis Reedt

Acting Deputy Director

Office of Research and Data

8