United States Sentencing Commission

Guide to

Publications

& Resources

1998-99
Guide to Publications & Resources:

Michael Courlander - Editor-in-Chief

Jeanne Doherty - Production Coordinator

Karen Lies - Production Assistant

United States Sentencing Commission Members and Staff

Richard P. Conaboy

Chairman

Michael S. Gelacak

Vice Chairman

Michael Goldsmith

Commissioner

Deanell R. Tacha

Commissioner

Michael J. Gaines

Ex-Officio

Mary Frances Harkenrider

Ex-Officio

i i i

John H. Kramer

Staff Director

John R. Steer

General Counsel

Sharon O. Henegan

Director of Training and Technical Assistance

Linda D. Maxfield

Acting Director of Policy Analysis

Richard J. McNeil

Acting Director of Monitoring

Timothy B. McGrath

Executive Assistant to the Chairman
United States Sentencing Commission

One Columbus Circle, NE

Suite 2-500 South Lobby

Washington, DC 20002-8002

June 1, 1998

MEMORANDUM

FROM: Richard P. Conaboy

Chairman

On behalf of the Commission, I am pleased to provide a copy of our 1998-

99 Guide to Publications & Resources. In furtherance of its mandate to promote

research and disseminate information on sentencing, the Commission offers this

catalog which lists and describes our available publications, data, and information

resources.

Please note that to make this guide easier to use, we have added subject

and title indexes. As an added help, the Commission offers its award-winning web

site (USSC OnLine) on the Internet at http://www.ussc.gov. A variety of Commission

reports, information, and materials are available via this resource.

Please feel free to call upon the Commission if you have any questions

about the catalog or if we may be of service in any other way.

Enclosure
Table of Contents

Information Resources .................................................. 3

HelpLine ..................................................... 3

Internet Site (USSC OnLine) .................................... 3

Video and Audio Tapes ......................................... 3

Newsclips, Public Comment, and Official Records .................. 4

Library Resources .............................................. 6

Training ...................................................... 6

Commission Publications ................................................ 7

Guidelines Manuals ............................................ 7

Annual Reports ................................................ 8

Reports to Congress ............................................ 9

Legal Briefs .................................................. 14

Working Group Reports ........................................ 15

Staff Discussion Papers – Simplification Project ................... 25

Other Reports and Publications ................................. 27

Commission Data ..................................................... 33

Monitoring Datasets ........................................... 33

Historical Datasets ............................................ 40

Special Study Datasets ......................................... 41

Index by Publication Title .............................................. A-1

Index by Subject ..................................................... B-1
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

1

Introduction

The United States Sentencing Commission, created by the Sentencing Reform

Act of 1984, establishes for the federal courts sentencing policies and practices that

further the purposes and objectives set forth in the Act. The Commission is

specifically directed by the Act: (1) to establish a research and development program;

(2) to provide a clearinghouse and information center for the collection, preparation,

and dissemination of information on federal sentencing practices; and (3) to serve in a

consulting capacity in the development, maintenance, and coordination of sound

sentencing practices. The Commission conducts research in support of its mandate,

compiles information on data sources and relevant criminal justice studies, and

collects data on guidelines application and other federal criminal justice processes to

inform the Congress, the criminal justice community, and the public. Under an

agreement with the Government Printing Office, copies of all basic Sentencing

Commission publications are made available in hard copy or on microfiche to patrons

using the GPO Regional Depository Libraries across the nation.

The location of the nearest Federal Depository Library can be determined in

several ways: (1) request a free copy of the Directory of Depository Libraries from the

U.S. Government Printing Office, Library Programs Services, Stop: SLLD,

Washington, DC 20401; (2) ask your local library for the address of the nearest Federal

Depository Library; and (3) use the Internet at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs;

select: “Information Available for Free Public Use in Federal Depository Libraries”;

search the listing by state or by area code.
United States Sentencing Commission

2

Publication and Resource Availability

The Commission seeks to carry out its congressional mandates through the

most efficient use of government resources and consistent with its agreement with

the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts regarding the confidentiality of certain

documents. Public access is available to all items listed in this Guide to Publications

& Resources. Some may be downloaded from the Commission’s web site, some are

available on request, others are placed in libraries across the nation, and still others

must be viewed on-site. Availability is indicated by the following codes:

USSC OnLine Available on Commission’s Internet site at the

address http://www.ussc.gov. See page 3 for

details.

SC-Request On request from the Sentencing Commission while

supplies last, then on-site inspection.

SC-Inspect On-site inspection at the Sentencing Commission.

SC-Loan From the Sentencing Commission for 24-hour loan.

GPO From the Government Printing Office for a fee.

RDL On-site inspection at GPO Regional Depository

Libraries. See page 1 for details.

Publisher From private publishers as indicated.

ICPSR From the Inter-University Consortium for Political

and Social Research, University of Michigan (data

only). Call 1-800-999-0960.

Address publication inquiries to:

United States Sentencing Commission

Office of Public Affairs

One Columbus Circle, N.E.

Room 2-500

Washington, D.C. 20002-8002
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

3

Information Resources

HelpLine (202-273-4545)

The Commission operates a telephone HelpLine to assist judges, probation

officers, prosecuting and defense attorneys, law clerks, and congressional staff

members with guideline application questions. The HelpLine is open to callers

Monday through Friday between 8:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., EST. 

Internet Site (www.ussc.gov)

Visitors to the Commission’s web site (USSC OnLine) at the address

www.ussc.gov can browse as well as download Commission documents and

materials. USSC OnLine is organized into nine categories: What’s New,

General Information, Reports to Congress, Publications, Guidelines Manuals

and Amendments, Guideline Training and Education, Federal Sentencing

Statistics by State, Commission Meeting Information, and Hearing Transcripts

and Testimony. The web site features its own search engine, and provides

links to other federal judicial agencies, as well as information about state

sentencing commissions and Commission employment opportunities.

Video and Audio Tapes

Audio and Videotape Sets: Drugs & Violence in America (June 16-18, 1993).

SC-Loan.

These two collections of ten video and nine audio tapes record the

Commission’s symposium on Crime and Punishment in the United States. 

This first symposium, Drugs & Violence in America, studied drug abuse and

violence from three perspectives: causation, prevention, and treatment. 

Participants included the Chief Justice of the United States, the Attorney

General, members of Congress, state officials, federal and state judges and

corrections officials, and law enforcement personnel.

Instructional Videotape on Guideline Amendments (November 1, 1993).

SC-Loan.

This training videotape, developed by the Sentencing Commission, highlights

significant new guideline amendments that took effect on November 1, 1993. 

In the 45-minute presentation, members of the Commission’s staff explain the

effects of changes to the drug guidelines, the consolidation of numerous

guidelines, revisions to the tax guidelines, additions to the retroactivity policy

statement, and other amendments.
United States Sentencing Commission

4

Videotape Set: Corporate Crime in America: Strengthening the Good Citizen’

Corporation (September 7-8, 1995).

SC-Loan.

This collection of ten videotapes records the Commission’s second symposium

on Crime and Punishment in the United States. This corporate crime

symposium focused on changes in corporate and business culture since

sentencing guidelines for organizational offenders became effective in 1991. 

Symposium presentations also addressed topics and policy issues raised in the

wake of the guidelines’ new emphasis on effective compliance programs.

Instructional Videotape on Guideline Amendments (December 1995).

SC-Loan.

This 35-minute training videotape examines the most important of the 25

amendments to the sentencing guidelines that took effect November 1, 1995. 

Most of the 1995 guideline amendments were the direct result of congressional

directives, instructions, or statutory changes contained in crime legislation

enacted in 1994.

Instructional Videotape on Guideline Amendments (November 1997).

SC-Loan.

This 20-minute training videotape examines the most important of the

amendments to the sentencing guidelines that took effect November 1, 1997. 

The majority of the amendments discussed respond to congressional directives,

including those that increase penalties for methamphetamine and immigration

offenses. Accompanying the video is a written reference guide that provides

additional information about all of the new amendments.

Newsclips, Public Comment, and Official Records

A collection of guidelines-related news clippings. 

SC-Inspect.

Files of public comment from individuals and organizations. 

SC-Inspect.

Minutes of Commission meetings.

(1992-present: USSC OnLine; RDL; pre-1992: SC-Inspect; RDL.)

United States Sentencing Commission Public Hearing Transcripts.

SC-Inspect; SC-Loan; RDL.

United States Sentencing Commission Public Hearings
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

5

Date Location Topic

April 15, 1986 Washington, DC Offense Seriousness

May 22, 1986 Washington, DC Prior Criminal Record

June 10, 1986 Washington, DC Organizational Guidelines

July 15, 1986 Washington, DC Sentencing Options (no transcript)

September 23, 1986 Washington, DC Plea Agreements (no transcript)

October 17, 1986 Chicago, IL Individual Guidelines

October 21, 1986 New York, NY Individual Guidelines

October 29, 1986 Atlanta, GA Individual Guidelines

November 5, 1986 Denver, CO Individual Guidelines

November 18, 1986 San Francisco, CA Individual Guidelines

December 2-3, 1986 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

February 17, 1987 Washington, DC Capital Punishment

March 11-12, 1987 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

March 22, 1988 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines (no transcript)

October 11, 1988 New York, NY Organizational Guidelines

December 2, 1988 Pasadena, CA Organizational Guidelines

April 7, 1989 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

February 14, 1990 Washington, DC Organizational Guidelines

March 15, 1990 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

December 13, 1990 Washington, DC Organizational Guidelines

March 5, 1991 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

February 25, 1992 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

March 22, 1993 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

November 9, 1993 Washington, DC Cocaine and Sentencing Policy

March 24, 1994 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines
United States Sentencing Commission

6

March 14, 1995 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

March 11, 1996 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

August 12, 1996 Denver, CO Guideline Simplification

March 18, 1997 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

March 5, 1998 San Francisco, CA Theft, Fraud, and Tax Crimes

March 12, 1998 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

Library Resources

SC-Inspect.

The Commission library, open to the public by appointment, contains a

collection of publications on criminal justice and sentencing-related issues.

Training

USSC OnLine.

A variety of exercises, visual aids, and other training materials designed by the

Commission are available to the public.

The Drug Conversion Software Program helps to determine marijuana

equivalencies of various drugs to aid calculation of the base offense level for

offenses involving different types of drugs. Once the type of drug, amount,

and unit of measurement are entered, the program will compute the marijuana

equivalency in kilograms for each type of drug. This program has been revised

to incorporate the 1997 amendments related to flunitrazepam and

methamphetamine. This program cannot be used for offense conduct

involving these two drugs that occurred prior to

November 1, 1997.

Commission Publications

Guidelines Manuals

The Guidelines Manual (1987-present) contains the official guidelines, policy

statements, and commentary issued by the Sentencing Commission. Prior to

their implementation on November 1, 1987, the Commission issued two drafts

for public comment. Each succeeding edition incorporates amendments

generated during the previous amendment cycle.
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

7

Preliminary Draft, Sentencing Guidelines (September 1986). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

Revised Draft, Sentencing Guidelines (January 1987). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

Sentencing Guidelines and Policy Statements (Submitted to Congress on

April 13, 1987).

SC-Inspect; RDL.

Guidelines Manual (Effective 11/1/87). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

Guidelines Manual (Amendments effective 01/15/88). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

Guidelines Manual (Amendments effective 06/15/88). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

Guidelines Manual (Amendments effective 10/15/88). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

Guidelines Manual (Amendments effective 11/01/89). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

Guidelines Manual (Amendments effective 11/01/90).

SC-Inspect; RDL.

Guidelines Manual (Amendments effective 11/01/91).

2 volumes.

SC-Inspect; RDL.

Amendments to the Guidelines Manual Mandated By Public Law 102-141

(Effective 11/27/91).

SC-Request; RDL.

Guidelines Manual (Amendments effective 11/01/92).

2 volumes.

SC-Inspect; RDL.

Guidelines Manual (Amendments effective 11/01/93).

2 volumes.

SC-Inspect; RDL.

Guidelines Manual (Amendments effective 11/01/94).

2 volumes.

USSC OnLine; RDL.

Guidelines Manual (Amendments effective 11/01/95).
United States Sentencing Commission

8

2 volumes.

USSC OnLine; RDL.

Amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines (Effective 11/01/96).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

Guidelines Manual (Amendments effective 11/01/97).

2 volumes.

USSC OnLine; GPO; Publisher (West, Matthew Bender, McGraw-Hill, Aspen Law and

Business); RDL.

Annual Reports

The Commission’s Annual Report has increased in size and coverage since

being introduced in 1986. It reports on Commission activities and research

data covering the fiscal year ending just prior to publication. The Annual

Report includes a Commission overview, discussion of recent amendments to

the sentencing guidelines and current legal issues, and (for the years 1988-1995)

extensive data on sentencing guideline application in the form of tables and

graphics.

Annual Report (1986 - present).

USSC OnLine (1995-present); SC-Request; SC-Inspect; RDL.

Sourcebook of Sentencing Statistics (1996-present).

USSC OnLine; SC-Request; RDL.

Beginning in 1996, the descriptive statistics portion of the Annual Report was

placed in this companion volume. The book contains demographic data on

individual defendants, guideline application, organizational sentencing

practices, and sentencing appeals. In addition, it provides selected district,

circuit, and national sentencing data.

Reports to Congress

Supplementary Report on the Initial Sentencing Guidelines and Policy Statements

(June 18, 1987). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

This report supplements and further explains the sentencing guidelines, policy

statements, and related commentary submitted to Congress on

April 13, 1987, along with the technical, conforming, and clarifying

amendments submitted on May 1, 1987. It also provides a brief historical

overview of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, a summary of the

Commission’s guidelines development process, and an analysis of the expected

effects of the guidelines and related legislation on federal correctional resource

requirements.
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

9

Statutory Penalties Project Description and Compilations of Federal Criminal

Offenses – Preliminary Report to the Congress (November 1, 1989). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

The Sentencing Commission is charged with reviewing penalty provisions of

federal criminal statutes and suggesting appropriate changes. This report is

organized into three sections. The first organizes federal statutes into 18

generic crime groups by title and section of the U.S. Code. The second

organizes the statutes into 18 generic crime groups according to the maximum

penalty contained in each statute. The third organizes all statutes that fall

within one of the most frequently prosecuted offense types according to the

maximum penalty for the offense.

Supplementary Report to the Congress: Statutory Penalty Review Project

(February 13, 1991). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

This report identifies four groups of statutory penalties that appear

inconsistent with the goals of sentencing reform as identified in the 1984 Act: 

(1) Offenses in Deprivation of Civil Rights, (2) Assault, (3) The Travel Act, and

(4) Involuntary Manslaughter. In general, the report makes recommendations

designed to remove various impediments created by statutory maximum

penalties.

Special Report to the Congress: Mandatory Minimum Penalties in the Federal

Criminal Justice System (August 1991).

USSC OnLine; SC-Request; Publisher (West); RDL.

This report responds to a statutory directive that the Commission examine the

compatibility of the sentencing guidelines and mandatory minimum penalties,

the effect of mandatory minimums on the federal system, and congressional

alternatives to mandatory minimums for directing sentencing policy. It

includes an historical overview of mandatory minimum penalties in the federal

system, a synopsis of the development of guideline sentencing, and a detailed

empirical study of mandatory minimums. The study uses monitoring data of

the Sentencing Commission as well as data collected for use in the

Commission’s evaluation study.

Supplementary Report on Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations

(August 30, 1991). 

SC-Loan; RDL.

This report supplements the sentencing guidelines for organizational

defendants (Chapter Eight of the Guidelines Manual, effective November 1,

1991). It addresses guideline background, structure, underlying rationale,

empirical bases, and significant estimated effects. Chapter One discusses

Commission procedures in developing the organizational guidelines. Chapter
United States Sentencing Commission

10

Two addresses the Commission’s resolution of major issues. Chapter Three

examines the structure of past practice for fines imposed on organizations, the

magnitude of average fines imposed, and the probable effect of the guidelines

on the level of fines.

The Federal Sentencing Guidelines: A Report on the Operation of the Guidelines

System and Short-Term Impacts on Disparity in Sentencing, Use of Incarceration,

and Prosecutorial Discretion and Plea Bargaining (December 1991) 2 volumes and

Executive Summary.

SC-Request; RDL.

This report fulfills a requirement in the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 that the

Commission study the impact of the guidelines on the criminal justice system

four years after their implementation. The study examines the impact of the

guidelines on prosecutorial discretion, plea bargaining, disparities in

sentencing, and the use of incarceration. 

Study results were based on data obtained from interviews conducted with

judges and federal court practitioners as well as data from the Federal Bureau

of Prisons, the U.S. Parole Commission, the Executive Office for U.S.

Attorneys, the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, and the Commission’s

monitoring system.

Analysis of Sentencing-Related Provisions of S. 2305 and H.R. 3371 Conference

Report Crime Bills (Spring 1992).

SC-Request; RDL.

This report analyzes and compares two crime bills considered during the 102nd

Congress: S. 2305, introduced by Senator Thurmond in 1992, and H.R. 3371, a

conference bill that passed the House of Representatives in October 1991 but

never came to a vote in the Senate. The report includes suggested technical

modifications along with general recommendations regarding the proposed

legislation.

Analysis of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (H.R. 3355)

(February 22 and June 8, 1994).

SC-Request; RDL.

This two-part report, prepared at the request of the chairmen of two House

Judiciary Subcommittees, analyzes and offers recommendations regarding key

provisions of the Senate and House versions of the crime bill. It includes

analyses of the bill’s “three strikes,” mandatory minimum “safety valve,” and

enhanced firearm penalty provisions along with prison impact assessments.

Report to Congress on the Maximum Utilization of Prisons Resources

(June 30, 1994).
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

11

SC-Request; RDL.

In response to a directive in the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, the Sentencing

Commission and the Federal Bureau of Prisons jointly prepared this report

which examines: (1) the modernization of existing facilities; (2) the use of

existing federal and other surplus facilities; and (3) inmate classification and

periodic review of such classification for use in placing inmates in the least

restrictive facility necessary to ensure adequate security. Examining key

programs, the report discusses inmate employment, alternatives to

incarceration, “boot camps,” drug treatment, family issues, and literacy and

education.

Special Report to the Congress: Cocaine and Federal Sentencing Policy

(February 1995).

USSC OnLine; SC-Request; RDL.

This report responds to a statutory directive that the Commission examine

federal sentencing policy as it relates to powder and crack cocaine and make

recommendations for appropriate changes. The report examines the

pharmacology, methods of use, and public health impact of cocaine; the drug’s

effects on society; cocaine distribution and marketing; cocaine’s relationship to

crime; the legislative history of cocaine penalties and constitutional challenges;

and data related to federal drug offenders. The study includes a thorough

review of available research, an analysis of cocaine sentences imposed under

the sentencing guidelines, and recommendations that the Commission and the

Congress make appropriate adjustments in the guidelines and the underlying

statutes.

Report to the Congress: Adequacy of Penalties for the Intentional Exposure of

Others, through Sexual Activity, to the Human Immunodeficiency Virus

(March 1995).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

In response to a statutory directive, the Commission reported on whether

revisions to the sentencing guidelines were needed to accommodate offenses

involving willful exposure to HIV. The report examines: (1) the operation of

the guidelines given the absence of a specific federal statute punishing the

intentional transmission of HIV; (2) cases sentenced in fiscal year 1993 to

determine the frequency with which HIV exposure was an issue at sentencing;

and (3) pertinent case law.

Report to the Congress: Adequacy of Penalties for Fraud Offenses Involving Elderly

Victims (March 1995).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This report responds to a congressional directive to review the adequacy of

victim-related guideline adjustments for fraud offenses against older victims. 
United States Sentencing Commission

12

The report includes: (1) an overview of the legislative history leading to the

statutory directive; (2) a discussion of the operation of the relevant sentencing

guidelines and policy statements; (3) an examination of case law; and (4) an

empirical analysis of relevant sentencing data.

Report to the Congress: Analysis of Penalties for Federal Rape Cases

(March 1995).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

Responding to a statutory directive, this report: (1) compares federal sentences

for cases in which the rape victim is known to the defendant with cases in

which the victim is not known; (2) compares federal sentences for cases

involving offenses occurring on federal territory with sentences in surrounding

states; and (3) analyzes the effect of rape sentences on populations residing in

federal territory. The report discusses relevant sentencing guidelines,

compares federal and state penalties for sexual assault, and analyzes

Sentencing Commission sexual abuse data.

Analysis of the Sentencing-Related Provisions of the Senate Committee Print of the

Immigration Reform Act of 1995 (Winter 1996).

SC-Request; RDL.

This report analyzes the principal criminal penalty provisions of the Senate

Committee Print of the Immigration Reform Act of 1995. The analysis was

prepared in response to a January 24, 1996, request from Senator Edward M.

Kennedy, the ranking minority member of the Senate Immigration

Subcommittee. The report includes recommendations for changes to the bill to

more fully achieve the goals of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984. 

Report to the Congress: Sex Offenses Against Children (June 1996).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This report analyzes all 1994 and 1995 cases involving sexual abuse, child

pornography, or the promotion of illegal sexual contact. The report responds to

a congressional directive in the Sex Crimes Against Children Prevention Act of

1995. Pertinent statutory provisions are analyzed and recommendations are

presented. 

Report to the Congress: Adequacy of Federal Sentencing Guideline Penalties for

Computer Fraud and Vandalism Offenses (June 1996).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This report responds to the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of

1996’s directive to review the deterrent effect of existing guidelines as they

apply to various computer crimes. The Commission reviewed its data of
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

13

guideline convictions under the pertinent statute, conducted a search to

determine whether any recidivism had occurred, developed a profile of a

“typical offender,” and conducted a literature review of deterrence studies of

“white collar” crime.

Special Report to Congress: Cocaine and Federal Sentencing Policy (April 1997).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This report contains Sentencing Commission recommendations regarding

penalties for powder and crack cocaine. The report, made pursuant to a

congressional directive, recommends that the current penalty differential for

federal powder and crack cases be reduced by changing quantity levels that

trigger mandatory minimum penalties for both powder and crack. 

Recommended are a range of possible options to adjust both powder and crack

penalties. Appended to this report is Vice Chairman Gelacak’s Concurring

Opinion.

Report to the Congress: Sentencing Policy for Money Laundering Offenses,

Including Comments on Department of Justice Report (September 18, 1997).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This report responds to a congressional directive to comment on the

Department of Justice’s report on federal prosecutorial charging and plea

practices affecting money laundering. In the report, the Commission reported

that the broad and inconsistent use of money laundering penalties, coupled

with an inflexible, arbitrarily determined guideline structure, is resulting in

substantial unwarranted disparity and disproportionality. The report identifies

a number of factors that have contributed to this situation, the most

fundamental being the historical context in which the current penalty structure

was devised.

Legal Briefs

Brief for the United States Sentencing Commission as amicus curiae in Mistretta v.

United States, 488 U.S. 361 (1989). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

Mistretta involved four separation of powers issues as well as a contention that

Congress had excessively delegated its legislative authority. In its amicus

brief, the Sentencing Commission principally argued that: (1) the structure of

the Commission was not violative of separation of powers provisions and did

not involve any congressional self-aggrandizement;

(2) neither the Executive nor the Judicial Branches are disrupted by the

delegation of the Commission to the Judiciary; (3) the mixed composition of

the Commission does not violate separation of powers because judges may take

part in extra-judicial tasks, and the prohibition against sharing the “judicial

power of the United States” with the executive branch is inapplicable; and (4)
United States Sentencing Commission

14

removal powers granted to the President in no way threaten the tenure or

salary of the judges as judges.

Brief for the United States Sentencing Commission as amicus curiae in United States

v. Lopez, 938 F.2d 1293 (D.C. Cir. 1991). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

In this brief, submitted at the request of the court, the Commission contended

that: (1) a court could not set aside a sentencing guideline or policy statement

for failure of the Commission to articulate adequately the basis and purpose of

the provision, and (2) the Commission had provided an appropriate statement

of reasons for its guidelines and policy statements. The Commission illustrated

the reasons why the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) did not apply to the

Sentencing Commission, with the exception of two individual provisions found

within 5 U.S.C. § 553(c) dealing with publication and public hearing procedures. 

The Commission asserted that it need only support its guideline decisions with

a “report [to Congress] stating the reasons for the Commission’s

recommendations.”

Brief for the United States Sentencing Commission as amicus curiae in United States

v. Bell, 991 F.2d 1445 (8th Cir. 1993).

SC-Inspect; RDL.

The United States Sentencing Commission filed a brief of amicus curiae in

support of the Government’s position as appellant that the ex post facto clause

is not applicable to sentencing guideline amendments. The Commission’s brief

contended that the guidelines themselves are not laws and therefore not

subject to ex post facto restrictions because: (1) the procedure through which

guideline amendments are promulgated involves no legislative action; (2)

judges retain discretion to sentence outside the guidelines as a result of a

flexible departure standard; and (3) the guidelines do not reclassify substantive

crimes but are based on statutory offense categories.

Memorandum of Law by the United States Sentencing Commission as amicus curiae

in United States v. McLellan, Criminal Action No. 1:91-CR-326A-01 (JOF) (N.D.GA.

1995).

SC-Inspect.

In this case, the defendant moved to invalidate the U.S. Sentencing

Commission and the sentencing guidelines on separation of powers grounds. 

The defendant contended that the Supreme Court decision in Mistretta v. U.S.

resolved only the facial validity of the Sentencing Reform Act and that,

irrespective of the Court’s decision, the Commission’s actions in implementing

the Act had violated the separation of powers doctrine. In its memorandum of

law as amicus curiae, the Commission argued that in resolving conflicts of

sentencing law among the federal circuits, advising Congress on sentencing

issues, and conducting studies of sentencing issues, it was fulfilling duties
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

15

mandated by the Act. These duties were all found to be proper for the

Commission in Mistretta, and thus the Commission was in no way stepping

outside the bounds of its constitutional role in fulfilling them.

Working Group Reports

Inter-disciplinary panels of Commission staff (“working groups”) produce

reports and documents on specific topic areas identified by commissioners. 

The working groups study specific guideline issues, identify areas of concern,

and make recommendations to the Commission.

Criminal Livelihood Working Group Report (March 23, 1988).

SC-Loan; RDL.

This report examines various issues relevant to the criminal livelihood

guideline (§4B1.3), including: (1) difficulties in applying the guideline,

(2) the guideline’s impact on lower-income petty offenders, and (3) the point at

which the guideline is calculated (i.e., before or after calculation of Acceptance

of Responsibility). The working group analyzed legislative history,

constitutional issues, monitoring data, and possible modifications of the

guideline.

Career Offender Guidelines Working Group Report (March 25, 1988).

SC-Loan; RDL.

This report examined questions about the career offender guidelines (§§4B1.1

and 4B1.2) arising from hotline calls and a training survey. The working group

also examined a Seventh Circuit case that raised issues of “ambiguity” in the

guidelines. The working group report includes a review of 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)

and the career offender guideline, examining the development, the legislative

history, and the operation of the statute and the guideline. The report

examines specific career offender guideline issues and proposals associated

with them and discusses advantages and disadvantages of various proposals.

Bank Robbery Working Group Report (March 29, 1989).

SC-Loan; RDL.

This working group report includes: (1) an analysis of preguidelines sentencing

practice for bank robbery offenses drawn from the 1985 augmented FPSSIS

data, designed to permit Commission comparison between past practice and

the guidelines; (2) an analysis of time served by offenders in cases involving

unarmed robbery of one bank in which no deaths, injuries, or abductions

occurred and the offender had no prior adult convictions and did not warrant

consideration as a minor participant or a leader; and (3) an analysis of key

offense and offender characteristics of 146 bank robbery cases sentenced under

the guidelines.
United States Sentencing Commission

16

Drugs, Firearms, and Violent Offenses Working Group Report

(December 18, 1989).

SC-Loan; RDL.

The working group, in assessing areas for proposed amendments, consulted

current and pending legislation, hotline calls, Commission sentencing data,

case law, public comment, Department of Justice proposals, and information

from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. The report recommends

restructuring the arson guideline (§2K1.4) to raise the base offense level and to

address the more mainstream arson cases. In addition, it recommends

clarification of the application notes for drug guidelines 2D1.1 and 2D1.2. 

Following its review of the firearms guidelines, the group proposed amending

guideline 2K2.1 to cover violations of 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). The group also

proposed changes to the murder-for-hire guideline for conspiracy or solicitation

to murder and recommended restructuring the guideline covering assault with

intent to commit murder (§2A.1.1).

Revocation Working Group Report (December 18, 1989).

SC-Loan; RDL.

This working group’s goal was the development of guidelines for violations of

probation and supervised release that would replace the policy statements in

Chapter Seven of the Guidelines Manual. The group reviewed existing policy

statements, relevant literature, legislative history, statistical data,

recommendations from the Department of Justice, and an internal draft of

proposed guidelines for violation and revocation procedures. The group

examined how probation and supervised release differ from each other and

from presentencing-reform practice. The report presents seven conclusions

about the development of guidelines for probation and supervised release

violations.

Criminal History Working Group Report (December 20, 1989).

SC-Loan; RDL.

This working group analyzed issues regarding the addition of a Criminal

History Category VII to the sentencing table and reviewed data on the

distribution of criminal history points and departures due to adequacy of

criminal history. The group also analyzed issues regarding the assignment of

criminal history points to uncounseled misdemeanor convictions and reviewed

practices and policies with respect to counting such convictions for criminal

history purposes.

Role in the Offense Working Group Report (January 4, 1990).

SC-Loan; RDL.
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

17

The working group evaluated the operation of the role in the offense

guidelines: guideline 3B1.1 (Aggravating Role – particularly the organizerleader-supervisor-manager distinction and the “otherwise extensive” provision)

and guideline 3B1.2 (Mitigating Role – particularly the treatment of relative

culpability of defendants). The working group analyzed potential problems in

the application of these guidelines by examining preguidelines cases,

Commission data, case files, appellate case law, and departure cases.

Working Group Report on Child Pornography, Obscenity Offenses, and Hate Crimes

(January 16, 1990).

SC-Loan; RDL.

The working group reviewed a broad range of resources in considering

potential amendments to the guidelines for offenses involving prostitution,

sexual exploitation of minors, obscenity, and civil rights. The report contains a

collection of relevant statutes, discusses the legislative history, digests data

from Commission case files, and discusses court decisions. The report also

reviews guideline application issues originating from hotline calls and public

comment on proposed guideline amendments. 

Aliens Working Group Report (October 18, 1990).

SC-Loan; RDL.

The working group studied guidelines pertaining to violations of immigration,

naturalization, and passport laws (§§2L1.1, 2L2.1, and 2L2.3). The group found

that the specific offense characteristic in each of these guidelines, based on

whether the defendant previously had been convicted of the same or a similar

offense, was not an adequate measure of the scope of the offense. The working

group considered public comment and studied pertinent case files to construct

an alternative set of specific offense characteristics for those guidelines. Based

on its case analysis, the working group suggested that a more direct measure of

the scope of the offense would be tables listing offense levels based on the

number of individuals or documents involved in the offense.

Drug Working Group Report – Listed Chemicals (November 13, 1990).

SC-Loan; RDL.

The working group examined the Chemical Diversion Trafficking Act, 21

U.S.C. § 841(d), to develop recommendations for guideline sanctions against

conduct proscribed by the Act. The group summarized the legislative history

of the Act and its primary listed chemical offenses, profiled offenders and cases

brought under the Act, reviewed monitoring data, summarized appellate case

law, and proposed two guideline amendment options.

Working Group Report on Category 0/VII (November 20, 1990).

SC-Loan; RDL.
United States Sentencing Commission

18

The working group examined the feasibility and consequences of expanding

the sentencing table to include a Criminal History Category VII and creating a

new category for “first offender.” By analyzing Commission data and case law,

the group profiled defendants who might fall under Criminal History

Categories 0 and VII. The group explored theoretical and practical

considerations involved in defining “first offender” and surveyed the potential

impact of various options.

Bank Robbery Working Group Report (December 10, 1990).

SC-Loan; RDL.

To inform the Commission about potential amendment options, the working

group explored three issues of concern about the way in which offenders are

sentenced pursuant to the robbery guideline: (1) Are offense levels for

unarmed bank robbery too low? (2) Are the enhancements for weapon use

sufficient? (3) Should an enhancement be provided for bank robberies

committed but not leading to a conviction?

The group studied Commission data, hotline reports, appellate court decisions,

nationwide data provided by the FBI about bank robbery, a survey of FBI field

offices about their experiences with the robbery guideline, and input from

practitioners.

Firearms and Explosive Materials Working Group Report (December 11, 1990).

SC-Loan; RDL.

The working group studied the firearms and explosives guidelines by

reviewing Commission data, case files, and appellate decisions and by soliciting

input from appropriate agencies and interested parties. The group proposed

combining a number of firearms and explosives guidelines to eliminate

duplication and confusion in application and to incorporate additional specific

offense characteristics.

Acceptance of Responsibility Working Group Report (October 16, 1991). 

SC-Loan; RDL.

This working group undertook a broad examination of the acceptance of

responsibility guideline (§3E1.1) in response to a request from the Criminal Law

Committee of the Judicial Conference for additional mitigation at higher

offense levels. The group focused specifically on: (1) whether the guideline

was being interpreted and applied consistently across the country; (2) whether

the guideline provided an appropriate offense level reduction, especially for

defendants whose offense levels were relatively high; (3) whether the guideline

needed to differentiate more precisely among defendants; and (4) whether

factors that the guideline did not consider would help a court determine when

the reduction was warranted.
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

19

Criminal History Working Group Report: Category 0, Category VII, Career Offender

(October 17, 1991). 

SC-Loan; RDL.

This working group examined: (1) the possible modification of criminal history

categories by adding a Category 0 and/or Category VII and

(2) factors to narrow or expand the applicability of the career offender

guideline. The group explored various methods of defining a “first offender” (a

possible criterion for Criminal History Category 0). The group also examined

the data to develop the criminal history point boundary for Category VI to

define eligibility for a new Category VII. A supplemental report was submitted

February 21, 1992.

Preliminary Report to the Commission: Staff Working Group on Alternatives

(October 23, 1991). 

SC-Loan; RDL.

In 1990, the Judicial Conference of the United States and the Alternatives to

Imprisonment Project chaired by Commissioner Helen G. Corrothers

submitted reports to the Commission recommending an increase in the

number of existing intermediate punishments, expansion of the pool of eligible

defendants, and a general increase in district courts’ flexibility in sentencing

certain offenders. This working group undertook a coordinated assessment of

the two reports and examined written comments and public hearing testimony

about alternatives from other judges, practitioners, and private citizens.

Child Sex Offense Working Group Report (December 1991). 

SC-Loan; RDL.

Congress directed the Sentencing Commission to amend guidelines for

offenses involving sexual crimes against children if the Commission

determined that current penalties were inadequate. In response, the child sex

offense working group conducted a study of sentences for sexual abuse,

kidnapping, and pornography cases.

Drug Working Group Report (March 27, 1992).

SC-Loan; RDL.

The working group reviewed a broad range of information as it considered

possible amendments to guidelines for relevant conduct, mitigating role in the

offense, drug trafficking offenses, and renting or managing a drug

establishment. To assist the Commission’s consideration of these issues, the

working group reviewed approximately 1,500 case files to profile sentencing

drug defendants and identify offense characteristics that relate to mitigating

role adjustments. The group analyzed the impact of prosecutorial selection of
United States Sentencing Commission

20

statutes that contain a lesser statutory maximum. As part of this analysis, the

group profiled so-called “courier” and “mule” cases to examine the relationship

between this offense behavior and the application of the mitigating role

adjustment. The data were organized to permit modeling of the impact of

potential amendment options.

Money Laundering Working Group Report (October 14, 1992). 

SC-Loan; RDL.

This report addresses whether the money laundering guidelines appropriately

reflect offense seriousness. The working group held meetings with

practitioners and analyzed computer data drawn from actual case files. 

Evidence indicated that offense levels for money laundering counts varied

significantly from offense levels for the underlying counts (e.g., drug

trafficking or a fraudulent scheme). A high percentage of offenders convicted

of money laundering also were involved in the underlying crime, which

suggests that money laundering was incidental to the underlying conduct. 

However, the guideline offense level for money laundering in drug cases

exceeded that for the underlying conduct 52.5 percent of the time and 96

percent of the time in non-drug cases. The group analyzed ways of aligning

these levels.

Violent Crimes/Firearms/Gangs Working Group Report (October 14, 1992).

SC-Loan; RDL.

This working group examined: (1) whether or not present guideline penalties

for these offense types were adequate, and (2) specific application problems

associated with these guidelines. The purpose of the gang study was to

examine issues pertinent to incorporating gang membership and gang crime as

sentencing factors.

The group conducted a systematic study of the offenses against the person and

the revised firearm guidelines. The study included computer analyses of

Commission data, an analysis of published court opinions dealing with the

pertinent guidelines, an examination of emerging questions and problems

directed to the Commission, and input from practitioners. The gang study

included a literature review, a survey of state sentencing commissions, and a

review of pertinent case law. The group issued an addendum to this report

March 30, 1993.

Report of the Drugs/Role/Harmonization Working Group (November 10, 1992).

SC-Loan; RDL.

The primary focus of this working group was the current quantity-driven drug

guideline. Its principal task was to explore alternative means of distinguishing

drug offenses and offenders on bases other than drug quantity. The group also

reviewed relevant case law to identify additional potential areas of interest
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

21

concerning the drug and role guidelines, with the primary objective of

identifying circuit court conflicts about guideline application.

The group examined the language and legislative history of the 1986 Anti-Drug

Abuse Act, conducted empirical research using Commission data, examined

hotline information, and reviewed state sentencing guidelines for drug

trafficking offenders. The group issued on April 1, 1993, an addendum

reporting on its case review project.

Juvenile Offenders Working Group Report (November 10, 1992). 

SC-Request; RDL.

The impetus for this working group was a statutory directive requiring the

Commission to “study the feasibility of developing guidelines for the

disposition of juvenile delinquents.” The report summarizes the group’s

progress to date following its analysis of available data. The report references a

Supreme Court case, United States v. R.L.C., which held that the maximum

sentence for juvenile delinquents is set by the guidelines. The group suggests

an amendment incorporating this holding and deleting a current policy

statement, 5H1.1 – age, which states that the guidelines do not apply to “a

person sentenced as a juvenile delinquent under the provisions of 18 U.S.C.

§ 5037.”

White Collar Crime Working Group Report (April 1993).

SC-Loan; RDL.

This working group considered issues relating to guidelines governing various

economic offenses, including property, fraud, antitrust, and tax offenses. The

report focuses primarily on theft and fraud issues on the one hand and tax

issues on the other. With respect to theft and fraud, the report encompasses

reliance on loss as a primary determinant of offense severity, the guideline

definition of loss, calibration of the loss tables, consolidation of the theft and

fraud guidelines, enhancement for more than minimal planning, and the abuse

of trust adjustment. With respect to tax, the major areas of inquiry cover the

impact on tax offenses of the expanded availability of non-prison sentences,

simplification of the tax guidelines, and tax offenses involving illegally derived

income. 

Computer Fraud Working Group Report (September 8, 1993).

SC-Loan; RDL.

The Computer Fraud Working Group studied the effectiveness of the fraud and

related guidelines on computer fraud offenses. To accomplish this, the

working group met with interested parties, conducted an empirical analysis of

cases sentenced under 18 U.S.C. § 1030, and reviewed public comment,

legislative history, case law, relevant literature, and hotline calls. Based on this

review, the group recommended that the Commission not adopt a new
United States Sentencing Commission

22

guideline for computer offenses, but instead revise the loss commentary in the

fraud guideline and explore whether other guidelines might be more

appropriate for certain offenses. The report also includes suggestions

regarding amendments to fraud guideline commentary. A working group

report summary is also available from the Commission.

Public Corruption Working Group Report (September 8, 1993).

SC-Loan; RDL.

The Public Corruption Working Group was charged with examining sentencing

practices under the public corruption guidelines. The review, which included

an examination of approximately 300 public corruption cases, identified a

number of topics involving application of the public corruption guidelines that

warranted examination: (1) a structural issue that involved the scope of

application of the guidelines; (2) issues involving application of guideline

adjustments in complex cases; and (3) an issue concerning the appropriateness

of departures on grounds of collateral consequences.

Food and Drug Working Group Preliminary Report (February 1994).

SC-Loan; RDL.

The Food and Drug Working Group was established to conduct a two-year

assessment of the feasibility of formulating organizational guidelines for

offenses involving food, drugs, and agricultural products (§2N2.1). The group’s

preliminary report includes: (1) an overview of the pertinent guideline and the

most commonly prosecuted offenses sentenced under it; (2) an analysis of food

and drug cases involving individuals sentenced under guideline 2N2.1 during

fiscal years 1991 and 1992; (3) a description of food and drug cases involving

organizational defendants sentenced under preguidelines law; and (4) an

analysis of significant application issues.

Money Laundering Working Group Report (February 28, 1995).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This follow-up to an October 1992 report reviews the history of the

Commission’s consideration of the money laundering guidelines, summarizes

the earlier report, and updates case law and other relevant information

available since the 1992 report. A working group report summary is also

available from the Commission.

Food and Drug Working Group Report (February 1995).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This update to a February 1994 report includes an overview of guideline 2N2.1

and the most commonly prosecuted crimes sentenced under it, provides a
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

23

description and analysis of food and drug cases involving individuals sentenced

under guideline 2N2.1 in fiscal years 1991-93, and describes food and drug cases

involving organizational defendants sentenced under preguidelines law.

Federal Court Practices: Sentence Reductions Based on Defendants’ Substantial

Assistance to the Government (May 1997).

SC-Loan; SC-Inspect.

This working group report studies the policies and practices associated with

the application of the substantial assistance policy statement. Topics include: 

(1) substantial assistance across districts; (2) caseload composition and trial

rates; (3) the characteristics of defendants who cooperate with authorities and

the type of assistance offered; (4) sentences for codefendants; and (5) the

prosecutorial and judicial roles.

Manslaughter Working Group Report (December 15, 1997).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This report studies the voluntary and involuntary manslaughter guidelines to

determine whether the current penalties are appropriate relative to other

violent offenses. The working group examined three years of Commission

sentencing data (FY 94-96), reviewed legal and social science literature on

manslaughter, compared federal sentencing standards with the practices of

selected states, and conducted a public hearing at which experts on

manslaughter testified. The report presents options to amend the guidelines

for Commission consideration.

Telemarketing Fraud Working Group Report (January 1998).

USSC OnLine; SC-Request; RDL.

This report studies telemarketing fraud offenses in conjunction with the

Commission’s multi-year comprehensive assessment of the fraud and related

guidelines. The report provides a legislative history of the relevant statutes

and guidelines, assesses guideline application issues affected by telemarketing

fraud enhancements, and examines the scope and nature of the telemarketing

fraud issue.

Staff Discussion Papers – Simplification Project

The Sentencing Reform Act (November 1996).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This staff discussion paper provides an overview of the principal purposes and

features of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 (SRA). The principal SRA

provisions that shape and constrain drafting of the sentencing guidelines are

described. The paper also generally describes Congress’s direction to the
United States Sentencing Commission

24

Commission to consider a variety of identified offense and offender

characteristics and to achieve desired levels of severity for particular categories

of defendants. Finally, the paper enumerates congressional directives enacted

subsequent to the SRA that further limit Commission amendment discretion.

Relevant Conduct (November 1996).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This staff discussion paper examines the tension between real-offense and

charge-offense sentencing and the Commission’s response to it: the relevant

conduct guideline. The paper discusses the federal criminal code and the ways

in which the code and the Sentencing Reform Act eliminate the possibility of a

pure offense of conviction sentencing system. The paper reviews the history of

the relevant conduct guideline, presents criticisms of the guideline, and

discusses state counterparts. Finally, the paper outlines broad options to

address these issues.

Level of Detail in Chapter Two (November 1996).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This paper focuses on the 151 offense guidelines in Chapter Two of the

Guidelines Manual. The paper discusses the choices the Commission made

about: the factors important to sentencing; the assignment of a specific weight

to a base offense level or a specific offense characteristic (SOC); cross reference

determinations; and departure decisions. Data is presented on the frequency of

guideline use, specific offense characteristics, cross references, and

adjustments. The paper concludes with a list of options for modifying the level

of detail in Chapter Two.

Chapter Three Adjustments (November 1996).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This staff discussion paper examines the major policy issues in Chapter Three

of the Guidelines Manual (except for “Part D - Multiple Counts” which is the

topic of a separate report) by reviewing data, case law, hotline calls, training

experiences, and pertinent literature. The aim of this paper is to explain: (1)

why Chapter Three includes certain adjustments; (2) how the adjustments are

working; (3) criticisms of these adjustments; and

(4) some options that would simplify or improve the present structure and

operation of Chapter Three guidelines.

Criminal History (November 1996).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This staff discussion paper has three components: (1) policy issues regarding

the ability of the current criminal history score to adequately distinguish
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

25

between offenders; (2) an outline of several issues that create guideline

application problems; and (3) alternative criminal history measures that may

improve the current guidelines.

Departures and Offender Characteristics (November 1996).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This paper analyzes departures and offender characteristics under the

guidelines and includes a discussion of pertinent sections of the applicable

statutory directives and their legislative history, an examination of the way in

which the Commission executed those directives, and a review of empirical

information on current departure practice and appellate review standards. The

report also contains summaries of criticisms of the manner in which departures

and offender characteristics are handled under the guidelines, and a

description of the way some state systems treat departures and offender

characteristics. Finally, the paper offers options for change that could simplify

and improve the operation of guidelines relevant to these issues.

Multiple Counts (November 1996).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This staff discussion paper reviews the guidelines’ multiple count rules

(Chapter Three, Part D). These rules were developed to provide appropriate

incremental punishment for defendants convicted of multiple offenses. The

paper presents information from a year’s worth of hotline calls that dealt with

multiple count application. Information on judicial interpretation was obtained

from appellate case law on multiple count issues.

Sentencing Options Under the Guidelines (November 1996).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

The Sentencing Options Working Group examined the various alternatives to

imprisonment that are possible under the guidelines. This paper analyzes: (1)

statutory directives regarding alternatives, (2) the ways in which the guidelines

define and allocate sentencing options, (3) criticisms of the existing approach,

(4) guideline complexity, (5) judicial use of existing options, (6) factors that

account for use or non-use of alternatives, and (7) evaluations of the

effectiveness of particular alternatives.

Other Reports and Publications
United States Sentencing Commission

26

Dissenting View of Paul H. Robinson on the Promulgation of Sentencing Guidelines

by the United States Sentencing Commission (May 1, 1987). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

This document contains Commissioner Paul Robinson’s dissenting viewpoint

on the Commission’s promulgation of its initial set of sentencing guidelines.

Preliminary Observations of the Commission on Commissioner Robinson’s Dissent

(May 1, 1987). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

In this document, the six commissioners who voted affirmatively to promulgate

the initial guidelines issued preliminary observations on Commissioner

Robinson’s dissent. Supplemental statements were issued by Commissioners

Ilene H. Nagel, Michael K. Block, and George E. MacKinnon.

Discussion Materials on Organizational Sanctions (July 1988). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

This volume contains discussion materials distributed by the Commission to

encourage public analysis and comment on the development of sentencing

standards for organizations convicted of federal crimes. These materials

include a discussion draft of sentencing guidelines and policy statements for

organizations, a draft proposal on standards for organizational probation, a

report on sentencing of organizations in the federal courts (1984-1987), and a

staff working paper on criminal sentencing policy for organizations.

Sentencing Guidelines for Organizational Defendants – Preliminary Draft

(November 1, 1989). 

SC-Loan; RDL.

This document presented the Commission’s preliminary proposal on this issue

and was published to encourage public comment on the proposal and on any

other aspect of the sentencing guidelines, policy statements, and commentary

as they applied to the sentencing of organizations. 

Public Access to Sentencing Commission Documents and Data, 54 Fed. Reg. 51279

(12/13/89). 

SC-Request; RDL.

This is a policy notice regarding public access to Sentencing Commission

documents and data and an agreement between the Administrative Office of

the U.S. Courts and the Sentencing Commission concerning the confidentiality

of certain sentencing information.
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

27

Amendment Highlights (1989-1996).

(Individual years)

SC-Request; RDL.

Amendment Highlights briefly summarizes the substantive and clarifying

amendments to the Guidelines Manual submitted to Congress during each

amendment cycle.

Selected Guidelines Application Decisions (1989-1996).

(Individual years)

USSC OnLine; SC-Request; RDL.

The Commission compiles summaries of selected cases, organized according to

pertinent guideline section, involving application of the federal sentencing

guidelines or related sentencing issues.

The Federal Offender: A Program of Intermediate Punishments (Alternatives to

Imprisonment Project) (December 28, 1990). 

SC-Loan; RDL.

The primary purposes of this commissioner-led project were to explore

community-based alternatives to imprisonment, to make recommendations

with regard to increasing the array of sanctions available to the federal courts,

and to ascertain the desirability of increasing the pool of offenders eligible for

intermediate sanctions. The report presented a package of recommendations

for consideration by the Commission. 

Sentences Imposed Under the Guidelines (October 1, 1990-September 30, 1991).

SC-Request; RDL.

This compilation is a modified version of the Sentences Imposed Chart,

formerly published by the Statistics Division of the Administrative Office of

the U.S. Courts. The Sentencing Commission modified the original report,

basing it on the guidelines applied rather than on the statutes of conviction. 

Data for the set of tables emanate from the 26,813 guideline defendants in the

Commission’s fiscal year 1991 monitoring files. Factors reported in this

volume are those considered by the court in arriving at a final sentencing

range.

U.S. Sentencing Commission Selected Reprints, Vol. I (June 1992). 

SC-Inspect; RDL.

This volume compiles eight previously published articles on federal sentencing

issues written by commissioners and staff. Topics include relevant conduct,

plea negotiations, acceptance of responsibility, departures, discretion, and drug

trafficking offenses.
United States Sentencing Commission

28

Proceedings of the Inaugural Symposium on Crime and Punishment in the United

States: Drugs & Violence in America (June 16-18, 1993).

SC-Request; RDL.

This volume contains the proceedings of the Commission’s first symposium in

a series on Crime and Punishment in the United States. The symposium

brought together more than 350 key policymakers to share information and

exchange ideas on the topic of drugs and violence. Chief Justice William H.

Rehnquist, Attorney General Janet Reno, Senators Edward M. Kennedy and

Joseph R. Biden, Jr., and Congresswoman Maxine Waters were among two

dozen government officials and experts who addressed the causes, prevention,

and treatment of drug abuse and violence. Video and audio tapes of the

symposium are available on loan from the Commission.

Plea Negotiations Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines: An Empirical

Examination of the Post-Mistretta Experience (December 1994).

SC-Loan.

This report, authored by U.S. Sentencing Commissioner Ilene H. Nagel and

University of Chicago Professor Stephen J. Schulhofer, explores the interrelationship between the federal sentencing guidelines and plea negotiation

practices during the period immediately following the Supreme Court’s

decision in Mistretta v. United States. This report includes an analysis of

qualitative data from site visits and an extensive review of sentencing

documents in ten selected jurisdictions.

Update on the Activities of the United States Sentencing Commission

(September 1995).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This compendium contains: (1) reports to Congress on penalties for federal

rape cases, adequacy of penalties for fraud offenses involving elderly victims,

and adequacy of penalties for the intentional exposure of others through sexual

activity to HIV; (2) the Commission’s majority and minority opinions on the

crack and powder cocaine issue; and (3) commissioners’ congressional

testimony on cocaine penalties.

Proceedings of the Second Symposium on Crime and Punishment in the United

States: Corporate Crime in America: Strengthening the “Good Citizen” Corporation

(September 7-8, 1995).

USSC OnLine; SC-Request; RDL.

This volume contains the proceedings of the Commission’s second symposium

in a series on crime and punishment. The symposium focused on the ways in

which companies, industries, and enforcement officials have responded to the

organizational sentencing guidelines’ “carrot and stick” incentives and other

changes in the enforcement landscape that encourage businesses to develop
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

29

strong compliance programs and adopt crime-controlling measures. 

Participants included federal enforcement officials, representatives of

corporations, private attorneys, and researchers who focus on business ethics

and crime.

A National Sample Survey: Public Opinion on Sentencing Federal Crimes

(October 1995).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This monograph reports the findings of a national sample survey

commissioned by the U.S. Sentencing Commission. Conducted in 1994

through face-to-face interviews with a probability sample of the American

populace, the study sought to find out how the American public would sentence

persons convicted of crimes under the Federal Criminal Code. This report

describes the sentences given, examines the principles used in giving

sentences, and compares the sentences to those recommended in the

guidelines.

Guideline Departures 1989-1995 (March 25, 1996).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This document summarizes upward and downward departures approved and

disapproved by appellate courts. Tables are presented that list specific

departure factors along with the cases in which the factors appear.

U.S. Sentencing Commission Selected Reprints, Vol. II (September 1996).

SC-Request; RDL.

This volume compiles seven previously published articles on federal

sentencing issues written by commissioners and staff. Topics include the role

of guideline amendments in reducing sentencing disparity, charging and

bargaining practices, competing sentencing policies in a “war on drugs” era,

and guidelines for organizations.

Just Punishment: Public Perceptions and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines

(February 1997).

USSC OnLine; SC-Request; RDL.

In this study, more than 1,700 citizens throughout the United States provided

their opinions on punishment and crime seriousness issues. This first-ever

survey of public attitudes toward federal sentences used a series of crime

“vignettes” incorporating relevant offense and offender characteristics. These

vignettes were presented at personal interviews and respondents were asked to

record what they considered to be a “just” and appropriate sentence in each

case. This staff paper describes the survey and its methodology, and compares

public perceptions with the corresponding sentencing guideline ranges for four
United States Sentencing Commission

30

selected federal offenses: drug trafficking, bank robbery, immigration

offenses, and fraud.

Rules of Practice and Procedure, 62 Fed. Reg. 38598 (July 18, 1997).

SC-Request; RDL.

This is a notice of the establishment of Sentencing Commission rules of

practice and procedure relating to the manner in which it conducts its business.

Substantial Assistance: An Empirical Yardstick Gauging Equity in Current Federal

Policy and Practice (January 1998).

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This exploratory research report examines the guidelines’ “substantial

assistance” policy statement in light of the guidelines’ overall statutory goal of

fair and honest sentencing. The study focused on whether different districts’

policies and procedures were consistent and whether similar defendants were

receiving similar sentence reductions for providing similar assistance. The

report explores the policies and procedures across judicial districts and

analyzes the factors associated with substantial assistance reductions and the

magnitude of the departures. Research methodologies include site visits to

eight federal judicial districts, surveys and interviews administered to U.S.

attorney offices, and descriptive and multivariate data analyses.

Supreme Court Cases and Circuit Conflicts.

SC-Request; RDL.

These documents, updated periodically, summarize Supreme Court decisions

along with circuit conflicts in cases involving the Commission, the federal

sentencing guidelines, and other related issues. Tables are presented that

illustrate circuit conflicts that have been addressed by Commission

amendment and those that are ongoing.

Guide Lines: News from the U.S. Sentencing Commission.

USSC OnLine; SC-Request; RDL.

Guide Lines, the Commission’s periodic newsletter, appears time to time with

information on current Commission activities, research findings, proposed

guideline amendments, training opportunities, and guideline application and

legal issues.

Worksheets. (To be used in conjunction with the Guidelines Manual)

USSC OnLine; SC-Request; RDL.

Individual: Worksheets A-D take the user step-by-step through application of

the sentencing guidelines for individual defendants. 
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

31

Organizations: Similar to the individual worksheets, Worksheets A-D take the

user step-by-step through application of the sentencing guidelines for

organizational defendants.

Probation/supervised release violation: This document assists the user with

application of the Commission’s policy statements on supervision violations.
United States Sentencing Commission

32

Commission Data

The Sentencing Commission systematically collects and publishes data on the

sentencing process and conducts special studies on sentencing-related issues. To

ensure confidentiality of respondents and sites, open-ended interview data from the

evaluation implementation study will be made available for on-site inspection only. 

All other data are available through the Inter-University Consortium for Political and

Social Research (ICPSR) at the University of Michigan. All datasets are available in

ASCII form on either diskettes or magnetic tape or via the following Internet address: 

http://www.ICPSR.umich.edu/NACJD/archive.html

For more information, contact Dr. Christopher S. Dunn, ICPSR, P.O. Box 1248,

Ann Arbor, MI 48106, or call 1-800-999-0960 or (313) 763-5011.

Monitoring Datasets

Datasets described in this section contain data on federal criminal cases

sentenced under the guidelines. Each federal court is required to forward to

the Commission several documents on each case sentenced under the

guidelines (except petty offenses) including the indictment(s), the presentence

report (PSR), the judgment of conviction (J&C), any written plea agreement, a

report on the sentencing hearing, any modification of sentence, and any

revocation of probation and supervised release.

The Commission’s staff enter pertinent information from the documents into

its data collection system. This system identifies the status of documents in

the file, assigns a unique identification number, and collects information

necessary to determine the applicability of the case. Cases sentenced under

“old law,” cases in which courts held the guidelines unconstitutional (prior to

Mistretta), and those involving solely petty offenses are not captured in these

datasets.

The prospective nature of the Sentencing Reform Act, coupled with

constitutional challenges to the Act, resulted in only 17.9 percent of all federal

criminal defendants sentenced in 1988 being sentenced under the guidelines. 

These proportions have increased yearly and are reflected in the increasing

number of cases available in the Commission’s annual Monitoring datasets.

Dataset entries are made on a per defendant/per sentencing basis (i.e., each

case is a consolidated sentencing of a single defendant). Multiple counts and

multiple indictments constitute a consolidated sentencing if the defendants

were sentenced at the same time and if a single PSR (and thus guideline range)

is produced. Defendants may appear in more than one case in the dataset if

they are involved in more than one consolidated sentencing. Multiple

codefendants in the same consolidated sentencing will each appear as a

separate case in the dataset.
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

33

Expansion of the Monitoring data collection system has resulted in additional

data elements being made available each year. The earliest datasets contain

primarily matched data from the Federal Probation Sentencing and

Supervision Information System (FPSSIS) datafile of the Administrative Office

of the U.S. Courts and sentence information collected from J&C orders

submitted by the courts. In 1990, basic guideline application information was

collected and included in subsequent datasets. In addition, the data collection

system was expanded to compensate for the elimination of the sentencing

portion of the FPSSIS data collection system in August 1990. In 1991, data

collection and files were upgraded to include in-depth guideline application

information as well as additional elements to supplement losses from the

FPSSIS system. In 1992, additional elements such as drug type were added to

the automated files. In 1996, drug amount, type of defense counsel, and

amount of loss were added.

In 1995, the Commission released the Appeals dataset, which tracks appellate

review of sentencing decisions.

Commission datasets are distributed by the Inter-University Consortium for

Political and Social Research at the University of Michigan (1-800-999-0960 or

313-763-5011). The codebook provided with each dataset discusses in detail

other criteria that describe cases included in the data. Pursuant to the policy

on public access to Sentencing Commission documents and data (54 Fed. Reg.

51279 (12/13/89)), all case and defendant identifiers have been removed from the

data.

USSC.88 (Monitoring dataset for calendar year 1988). 

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 6,223 cases received by the Sentencing Commission as of

November 8, 1989, that were sentenced between November 1, 1987, and

December 31, 1988 (inclusive).

Information available in this dataset includes data elements from the FPSSIS

file of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts and sentence information

collected from the J&C submitted by the court.

USSC.89-H (Monitoring dataset for first six months of calendar year 1989).

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 9,360 cases received by the Sentencing Commission as of

November 8, 1989, that were sentenced between January 1 and

June 30, 1989 (inclusive).

Information available in this dataset includes data elements from the FPSSIS

file of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts and sentence information

collected from the J&C submitted by the court.
United States Sentencing Commission

34

USSC.89 (Monitoring dataset for calendar year 1989). 

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 22,676 cases received by the Sentencing Commission as

of February 28, 1990, that were sentenced between January 19, 1989, and

December 31, 1989 (inclusive).

Information available in this dataset includes data elements from the FPSSIS

file of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts and sentence information

collected from the J&C submitted by the court.

USSC.FY90 (Monitoring dataset for fiscal year 1990). 

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 29,011 cases received by the Sentencing Commission as

of December 28, 1990, that were sentenced between October 1, 1989, and

September 30, 1990 (inclusive).

Information available in this dataset includes data elements from the FPSSIS

file of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, sentence information

collected from the J&C submitted by the court, and basic guideline information

collected from the PSR and the report on the sentencing hearing.

USSC.FY91 (Monitoring dataset for fiscal year 1991). 

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 33,419 cases received by the Sentencing Commission as

of January 17, 1992, that were sentenced between October 1, 1990, and

September 30, 1991 (inclusive).

This dataset includes sentence information collected from the J&C submitted

by the court, background information collected from the PSR, and in-depth

guideline information collected from the PSR and the report on the sentencing

hearing.

USSC.FY92 (Monitoring dataset for fiscal year 1992).

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 38,258 cases received by the Sentencing Commission as

of January 26, 1993, that were sentenced between October 1, 1991, and

September 30, 1992 (inclusive).
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

35

Information available in this dataset includes sentence information collected

from the J&C submitted by the court, background information collected from

the PSR, and in-depth guideline information collected from the PSR and the

report on the sentencing hearing.

USSC.FY93 (Monitoring dataset for fiscal year 1993).

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 42,107 cases received by the Sentencing Commission as

of January 11, 1994, that were sentenced between October 1, 1992, and

September 30, 1993 (inclusive).

Information available in this dataset includes sentence information collected

from the J&C submitted by the court, background information collected from

the PSR, and in-depth guideline information collected from the PSR and the

report on the sentencing hearing.

USSC.FY94 (Monitoring dataset for fiscal year 1994).

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 39,971 cases received by the Sentencing Commission as

of December 23, 1994, that were sentenced between October 1, 1993, and

September 30, 1994 (inclusive).

Information available in this dataset includes sentence information collected

from the J&C submitted by the court, background information collected from

the PSR, and in-depth guideline information collected from the PSR and the

report on the sentencing hearing.

USSC.FY95 (Monitoring dataset for fiscal year 1995).

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 38,500 cases received by the Sentencing Commission as

of December 26, 1995, that were sentenced between October 1, 1994, and

September 30, 1995 (inclusive).

Information available in this dataset includes sentence information collected

from the J&C submitted by the court, background information collected from

the PSR, and in-depth guideline information collected from the PSR and the

report on the sentencing hearing.

USSC.FY96 (Monitoring dataset for fiscal year 1996).

ICPSR.
United States Sentencing Commission

36

This dataset includes 42,439 cases received by the Sentencing Commission as

of December 27, 1996, that were sentenced between October 1, 1995, and

September 30, 1996 (inclusive).

Information available in this dataset includes sentence information collected

from the J&C submitted by the court, background information collected from

the PSR, and in-depth guideline information collected from the PSR and the

report on the sentencing hearing.

USSC.FY97 (Monitoring dataset for fiscal year 1997).

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 48,848 cases received by the Sentencing Commission as

of January 31, 1998, that were sentenced between October 1, 1996, and

September 30, 1997 (inclusive).

Information available in this dataset includes sentence information collected

from the J&C submitted by the court, background information collected from

the PSR, and in-depth guideline information collected from the PSR and the

report on the sentencing hearing.

Federal Sentencing Statistics by District and Circuit (1996, 1997).

USSC OnLine.

This set of tables provides district, circuit, and national data on: primary

offense category, mode of conviction, type of sentence, average length of

imprisonment, departure rates, and incarceration rates of defendants eligible

for non-prison sentences. 

USSC.ORGSAN93 (Organizational defendant dataset).

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 50 cases in which organizational defendants were

sentenced under the Chapter Eight guidelines during the period

November 1, 1991, to September 30, 1993, and 50 antitrust cases sentenced

under the fine provisions of §2R1.1 during the period November 1, 1987, to 

September 30, 1993. The module captures information describing

organizational structure, size, and economic viability; offense of conviction;

mode of adjudication; sanctions imposed; and application of the sentencing

guidelines.

USSC.ORGSAN94 (Organizational defendant dataset).

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 86 cases in which organizational defendants were

sentenced under the Chapter Eight guidelines and 18 cases in which
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

37

organizational defendants were sentenced under the fine provisions of §2R1.1

(1987) during the period October 1, 1993, through September 30, 1994. The

module captures information describing organizational structure, size, and

economic viability; offense of conviction; mode of adjudication; sanctions

imposed; and application of the sentencing guidelines.

USSC.ORGSAN95 (Organizational defendant dataset).

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 111 cases in which organizational defendants were

sentenced under the Chapter Eight guidelines and four cases in which

organizational defendants were sentenced under the fine provisions of §2R1.1

(1987) during the period October 1, 1994, through September 30, 1995; and were

received by the Commission by December 26, 1995. The module captures

information describing organizational structure, size, and economic viability;

offense of conviction; mode of adjudication; sanctions imposed; and application

of the sentencing guidelines. 

USSC.ORGSAN96 (Organizational defendant dataset).

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 148 cases in which organizational defendants were

sentenced under the Chapter Eight guidelines plus seven cases in which

organizational defendants were sentenced under the fine provisions of §2R1.1

(1987) during the period October 1, 1995, through September 30, 1996; and were

received by the Commission by December 27, 1996. The module captures

information describing organizational structure, size, and economic viability;

offense of conviction; mode of adjudication; sanctions imposed; and application

of the sentencing guidelines. 

USSC.ORGSAN97 (Organizational defendant dataset).

ICPSR.

This dataset includes cases in which organizational defendants were sentenced

under the Chapter Eight guidelines plus cases in which organizational

defendants were sentenced under the fine provisions of §2R1.1 (1987) during

the period October 1, 1996, through September 30, 1997; and were received by

the Commission by January 31, 1998. The module captures information

describing organizational structure, size, and economic viability; offense of

conviction; mode of adjudication; sanctions imposed; and application of the

sentencing guidelines. 

USSC.APPEAL93 (Appeals dataset).

ICPSR.
United States Sentencing Commission

38

This dataset includes 6,078 appellants whose cases were filed March 9, 1990,

through September 30, 1993, and were received by the Commission by

December 22, 1993. Information captured in the module includes district,

circuit, date of appeal, date of opinion, legal issues before the court, and the

court’s disposition.

USSC.APPEAL94 (Appeals dataset).

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 6,745 appellants whose cases were filed

October 1, 1993, through September 30, 1994, and were received by the

Commission by December 22, 1994. Information captured in the module

includes district, circuit, date of appeal, date of opinion, legal issues before the

court, and the court’s disposition.

USSC.APPEAL95 (Appeals dataset).

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 6,863 appellants whose cases were filed 

October 1, 1994, through September 30, 1995, and were received by the

Commission by December 26, 1995. Information captured in the module

includes district, circuit, date of appeal, date of opinion, legal issues before the

court, and the court’s disposition.

USSC.APPEAL96 (Appeals dataset).

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 6,710 appellants whose cases were filed

October 1, 1995, through September 30, 1996, and were received by the

Commission by December 27, 1996. Information captured in the module

includes district, circuit, date of appeal, date of opinion, legal issues before the

court, and the court’s disposition.

USSC.APPEAL97 (Appeals dataset).

ICPSR.

This dataset includes 6,496 appellants whose cases were filed October 1, 1996,

through September 30, 1997, and were received by the Commission by January

31, 1998. Information captured in the module includes district, circuit, date of

appeal, date of opinion, legal issues before the court, and the court’s

disposition.

Historical Datasets
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

39

Augmented FPSSIS Fiscal Year 1985 Convictions Dataset (July 1991). 

ICPSR.

The sentencing and related data in this collection were gathered from a

stratified random sample of defendants convicted in U.S. district courts during

fiscal year 1985. The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts’ Federal

Probation Sentencing and Supervision Information System (FPSSIS) file was

the primary source of these data. The data include a description of the offense,

a characterization of the defendant’s background and criminal record, the

method of disposition of the case, and the sentence imposed. Felony and

misdemeanor cases are included, while petty offense cases are not.

Three types of additional information augment the existing FPSSIS data: 

(1) more detailed offense and offender characteristics identified by the

Sentencing Commission and coded by federal probation officers; (2) actual time

served in prison and projected time served from the SENTRY datafile of the

U.S. Bureau of Prisons; and (3) information necessary to estimate prospective

release dates from the hearing files of the U.S. Parole Commission.

The Commission collected these data during the development of the initial

sentencing guidelines. Analyses of the data represented a study of past

sentencing practices that proved important in the drafting of the guidelines as

well as an assessment of prospective guidelines’ impact on sentencing practices

and prison populations.

This dataset consists of four separate files of 10,570 individuals (drug offenses

dataset, n=2,879; street crimes dataset, n=2,756; white collar crimes dataset,

n=2,815; other offenses, n=2,210) sentenced for serious misdemeanor or felony

offenses between October 1, 1984, and September 30, 1985. Pursuant to the

policy on public access to Sentencing Commission documents and data (54 Fed.

Reg. 51279, 12/13/89), all case and defendant identifiers have been removed

from the data.

Special Study Datasets

Organizations Sentenced in Federal Courts, 1988, and Organizations Sentenced in

Federal Courts, 1989-90. 

ICPSR.

To support the development of the Chapter Eight guidelines, the Commission

conducted two studies of sentencing practices for organizational defendants in

federal district courts. Dataset analyses from the two studies are included in

the Commission’s Supplementary Report on Sentencing Guidelines for

Organizations.

The data include information on: (1) organizational defendants sentenced from

January 1 through December 31, 1988 (n=328); and (2) organizational
United States Sentencing Commission

The FPSSIS data used for the mandatory minimum study include all 267,178 cases 1

sentenced between January 1, 1984, and June 30, 1990. FPSSIS data were used to identify

the sample by distinguishing the underlying conduct in a given case as potentially

involving mandatory minimum behavior. To classify cases, the data used were the total

pure amount of drugs and presence of a weapon.

These data include the Commission’s monitoring dataset for the fiscal year 1990 2

(MONFY90), with 29,011 defendants sentenced between October 1, 1989, and September 30,

1990.

40

defendants sentenced from January 1, 1989, through June 30, 1990 (n=446). For

each of these studies, relevant information was extracted from presentence

investigation reports, charging documents, and judgment of conviction orders.

Mandatory Minimum Study Sample Dataset, 1989-90.

ICPSR.

Pursuant to a congressional directive, the Sentencing Commission completed a

study of federal mandatory minimum statutes. As part of this endeavor, a

sample of the Commission’s fiscal 1990 data release was augmented by a

special coding project. This project was intended to supplement the normal

data collection activities of the Commission with information specific to the

application and effect of mandatory minimum statutes on the guidelines and

the federal criminal justice system. In particular, the sample dataset was

developed to supplement the FPSSIS and Commission monitoring data with 1 2

pertinent preconviction information and to allow for a procedural tracking of

cases and application of mandatory minimum provisions at various stages of

the criminal justice process.

A 12.5 percent random sample was selected from the 29,011 MONFY90 cases. 

Initial computer screening identified 2,210 relevant sample cases qualifying

due to the presence of drugs in the offense, drugs and weapons, or robbery with

weapons. A study of these cases yielded a sample of 1,165 cases, representing

defendants for whom the offense behavior indicated the appropriateness of

mandatory minimum penalties. A coding system developed for analysis of

these cases incorporated case eligibility for mandatory minimum charges (e.g.,

the amount of drug by type sufficient to invoke 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A) or

requirements satisfying the “using or carrying” firearm provision of 18 U.S.C. §

924(c)). A conservative interpretation of the legal criteria minimized the chance

of inclusion for cases not clearly mandatory in their offense behavior. 

Information coded on these 1,165 defendants included real offense behavior,

indictment history, mode of conviction, convicted charges, sentences imposed,

plea agreements, stipulations, and guideline factors.

1991 Evaluation Study.

The datasets identified below were used to prepare The Federal Sentencing

Guidelines: A Report on the Operation of the Guidelines System and ShortTerm Impacts on Disparity in Sentencing, Use of Incarceration, and
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

41

Prosecutorial Discretion and Plea Bargaining, submitted to Congress and the

GAO in December 1991: 

1991 Evaluation Study: National Survey Data. 

ICPSR.

The data in this collection are from a national survey of judges and court

practitioners developed in response to issues raised during site visits for the

implementation study.

This national mail survey sample consisted of all federal district judges, public

defenders, a random sample of assistant U.S. attorneys engaged in criminal

work, federal panel attorneys, and federal probation officers preparing

presentence reports or conducting the investigation for those reports. Sixty

percent of the surveys were returned completed (1,802 out of 2,998 sampled).

1991 Evaluation Study: Disparity Data. 

ICPSR.

Four disparity datasets, each representing one of four major offense types

(bank robbery, cocaine distribution, heroin distribution, and bank

embezzlement) drew data for this study from the FPSSIS dataset, an

augmented FPSSIS dataset constructed by the Commission representing

offenders sentenced in 1985, the Commission’s guidelines sentence monitoring

system, the Federal Bureau of Prisons, and the U.S. Parole Commission. The

dataset available through ICPSR represents data expanded beyond what was

available for the evaluation study and includes demographic variables not

coded at the time of the evaluation. The datasets contain information on

preguideline defendants sentenced during fiscal year 1985 (October 1, 1984 -

September 30, 1985) and were compiled to assist the Commission in developing

the initial guidelines. These data came predominantly from the Administrative

Office of the U.S. Courts but were augmented by a special Commission data

collection. Because constitutional challenges to the guidelines delayed

nationwide implementation for 15 months, fewer guideline cases were available

for analysis than originally anticipated. Therefore, to increase the sample size,

guideline datasets for bank robbery, bank embezzlement, and heroin

distribution offenses cover more than one fiscal year (e.g., offenders sentenced

between January 19, 1989, and September 30, 1990).

The cocaine dataset includes additional variables not found in the other three

disparity datasets that indicate type and amount of drugs. The Anti-Drug

Abuse Act of 1986 (ADAA86), in setting equivalencies for various types and

amounts of drugs, established different equivalencies for powder cocaine and

cocaine base. Data available through FPSSIS do not distinguish between

powder cocaine and cocaine base (crack). The guidelines incorporated the

statutory equivalencies by equating one unit of cocaine base to 100 units of

cocaine powder (see guideline 2D1.1). The Commission undertook a special

data collection effort that produced a file identifying the particular type of
United States Sentencing Commission

42

cocaine. Consequently, the cocaine dataset covers a much shorter time frame,

from September to December 1990. The Commission’s augmented FPSSIS

data serve as the preguidelines source for the sample of cocaine distribution

cases.

Cases in each of the four datasets represent single counts of conviction or

multiple counts that generally would not enhance either the preguidelines or

guidelines sentence. The bank embezzlement dataset contains 1,143 cases (536

preguidelines and 607 guidelines); the bank robbery sample 1,372 cases (502

preguidelines and 870 guidelines); the heroin distribution sample 1,454 cases

(530 preguidelines and 924 guidelines); and the cocaine distribution sample

1,710 cases (328 preguidelines and 1,382 guidelines).

1991 Evaluation Study: Time Series Data. 

ICPSR.

The data in this collection represent two separate studies designed to assess

the impact of the sentencing guidelines. The first is a use of incarceration

study, which includes data on the incarcerative and non-incarcerative

sentences imposed and the average length of expected time to be served in

incarceration for all offenses as well as for select groups of offenses. The

second is a prosecutorial discretion and plea bargaining study, which includes

data on the numbers of matters initiated, cases filed, and cases disposed of by

guilty plea and trial.

Both studies reflect monthly time series before and after the implementation of

the guidelines in November 1987. FPSSIS files from the Administrative Office

of the U.S. Courts defined the universe of observations for the study on use of

incarceration. FPSSIS records have been matched with data from the

Sentencing Commission’s Monitoring dataset, the Federal Bureau of Prisons,

and the U.S. Parole Commission to obtain the relevant variables to compute the

outcome variable “expected time to be served.” Individual sentence records in

each of the datasets have been merged into one dataset. Data on use of

incarceration reflect monthly time series covering the period from 1984 to 1990.

The monthly time series measurements for the prosecutorial discretion and

plea bargaining study cover the period from 1984 to 1990. These monthly time

series have been constructed from two datasets maintained by the Executive

Office for U.S. Attorneys: (1) Docket and Reporting System for Fiscal Years

1984-1986, and (2) Criminal Master File with Auxiliary Events and Charge Files

(referred to as the new data system) for fiscal years 1987-1990. These datasets

contain processing information about matters initiated, cases filed, and cases

resolved in U.S. attorney offices in each federal district.

1991 Evaluation Study: Implementation Study Interviews.

SC-Inspect.
Guide to Publications & Resources # 1998-99

43

This is a hard copy of implementation study interviews with judges, probation

officers, assistant U.S. attorneys, federal defenders, private counsel, and federal

court clerks.
A-1

Index by Publication Title

A

Acceptance of Responsibility Working Group Report .................................... 19

Adequacy of Federal Sentencing Guideline Penalties for Computer Fraud

and Vandalism Offenses: Report to the Congress ................................ 13

Adequacy of Penalties for Fraud Offenses: Report to the Congress ....................... 12

Adequacy of Penalties for the Intentional Exposure of Others, through

Sexual Activity, to HIV: Report to the Congress .................................. 12

Aliens Working Group Report ......................................................... 18

Amendment Highlights ............................................................... 28

Analysis of Penalties for Federal Rape Cases: Report to the Congress .................... 12

Analysis of Sentencing-Related Provisions of S. 2305 and H.R. 3371

Conference Report Crime Bills ................................................. 11

Analysis of the Sentencing-Related Provisions of the Senate Committee

Print of the Immigration Reform Act of 1995 ..................................... 13

Analysis of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of

1994 (H.R.3355) ................................................................ 11

Annual Report ........................................................................ 8

 

B

Bank Robbery Working Group Report ............................................... 16, 19

Brief for the United States Sentencing Commission as amicus curiae

In Mistretta V. United States ................................................... 14

Brief for the United States Sentencing Commission as amicus curiae

In United States v. Lopez. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Brief for the United States Sentencing Commission as amicus curiae

In United States v. Bell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

C

Career Offender Guidelines Working Group Report ..................................... 16

Chapter Three Adjustments: Staff Discussion Paper .................................... 25

Child Pornography, Obscenity Offenses, and Hate Crimes: Working Group Report ........ 18

Child Sex Offense Working Group Report .............................................. 20

Cocaine and Federal Sentencing Policy (1995): Special Report to the Congress ........... 11

Cocaine and Federal Sentencing Policy (1997): Special Report to the Congress ............ 13

Computer Fraud Working Group Report ................................................ 22

Criminal History: Staff Discussion Paper .............................................. 26

Criminal History Working Group Report ............................................... 17

Criminal History Working Group Report: Category 0, Category VII .................... 18, 20

Criminal Livelihood Working Group Report ............................................ 16
A-2

D

Departures and Offender Characteristics: Staff Discussion Paper ........................ 26

Discussion Materials on Organizational Sanctions ...................................... 27

Dissenting View of Paul H. Robinson on the Promulgation of Sentencing

Guidelines by the United States Sentencing Commission ......................... 27

Drug Working Group Report .......................................................... 20

Drug Working Group Report – Listed Chemicals ........................................ 18

Drugs, Firearms, and Violent Offenses Working Group Report ........................... 16

F

Federal Court Practices: Sentence Reductions Based on Defendants’ 

Substantial Assistance to the Government ....................................... 24

Federal Offender: A Program of Intermediate Punishments ............................. 28

Federal Sentencing Guidelines: A Report on the Operation of the Guidelines

System and Short-Term Impacts on Disparity in Sentencing, Use of 

Incarceration, and Prosecutorial Discretion and Plea Bargaining .................. 10

Firearms and Explosive Materials Working Group Report ............................... 19

Food and Drug Working Group Preliminary Report ..................................... 23

Food and Drug Working Group Report ................................................. 24

G

Guide Lines: News from the U.S. Sentencing Commission .............................. 32

Guideline Departures 1989-1995 ....................................................... 30

Guidelines Manual .................................................................... 7

I

Initial Sentencing Guidelines and Policy Statements: Supplementary Report .............. 9

J

Just Punishment: Public Perceptions and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines ............ 31

Juvenile Offenders Working Group Report ............................................. 22

L

Level of Detail in Chapter Two: Staff Discussion Paper .................................. 25

M

Mandatory Minimum Penalties: Special Report to the Congress .......................... 9

Manslaughter Working Group Report .................................................. 24

Maximum Utilization of Prisons Resources: Report to the Congress ...................... 11

Memorandum of Law by the United States Sentencing Commission as

amicus curiae in United States v. McLellan ...................................... 15
A-3

Money Laundering Working Group Report .......................................... 21, 23

Multiple Counts: Staff Discussion Paper ............................................... 26

N

National Sample Survey: Public Opinion on Sentencing Federal Crimes ................. 30

P

Plea Negotiations Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines: An Empirical

Examination of the Post-Mistretta Experience ................................... 29

Preliminary Observations of the Commission on Commissioner Robinson’s Dissent ....... 27

Preliminary Report to the Commission: Staff Working Group on Alternatives ............. 20

Proceedings of the Inaugural Symposium on Crime and Punishment 

In the United States: Drugs & Violence in America .............................. 29

Proceedings of the Second Symposium on Crime and Punishment

In the United States: Corporate Crime in America: Strengthening

The “Good Citizen” Corporation ................................................ 30

Public Access to the Sentencing Commission Documents and Data ...................... 28

Public Corruption Working Group Report .............................................. 23

R

Relevant Conduct: Staff Discussion Paper ............................................. 25

Report of the Drugs/Role/Harmonization Working Group ................................ 21

Revocation Working Group Report ..................................................... 17

Role in the Offense Working Group Report ............................................. 17

Rules of Practice and Procedure ....................................................... 31

S

Selected Guidelines Application Decisions ............................................. 28

Selected Reprints, Vol. I .............................................................. 29

Selected Reprints, Vol. II .............................................................. 31

Sentences Imposed Under the Guidelines .............................................. 29

Sentencing Guidelines and Policy Statements ........................................... 7

Sentencing Guidelines for Organizational Defendants: Preliminary Draft ................ 28

Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations: Supplementary Report ........................ 10

Sentencing Options Under the Guidelines: Staff Discussion Paper ....................... 27

Sentencing Policy for Money Laundering Offenses, Including Comments on

Department of Justice Report: Report to the Congress ........................... 14

Sentencing Reform Act: Staff Discussion Paper ........................................ 25

Sex Offenses Against Children: Report to the Congress ................................. 13

Sourcebook of Sentencing Statistics .................................................... 8

Statutory Penalties Project Description and Compilations of Federal Criminal

Offenses - Preliminary Report to the Congress .................................... 9

Statutory Penalty Review: Supplementary Report to the Congress ........................ 9

Substantial Assistance: An Empirical Yardstick Gauging Equity in Current

Federal Policy and Practice ..................................................... 31

Supreme Court Cases and Circuit Conflicts ............................................. 32
A-4

T

Telemarketing Fraud Working Group Report ........................................... 24

U

Update on the Activities of the United States Sentencing Commission .................... 30

V

Violent Crimes/Firearms/Gangs Working Group Report .................................. 21

W

White Collar Crime Working Group Report ............................................. 22
B-1

Index by Subject

A

acceptance of responsibility ........................................................... 19

adjustments to guidelines ............................................................. 25

alternatives to incarceration ..................................................... 20, 27, 28

annual reports ........................................................................ 8

B

bank robbery ..................................................................... 16, 19

C

career offender ....................................................................... 16

case law ......................................................................... 28, 32

chapter two offenses .................................................................. 25

child pornography .................................................................... 18

child sex offenses ................................................................. 13, 20

cocaine sentencing policy ......................................................... 11, 13

corporate crime .......................................................... 4, 10, 27, 28, 30

crime bill analysis ................................................................ 11, 13

criminal history ............................................................ 17, 18, 20, 26

criminal livelihood ................................................................... 16

D

data ................................................................................. 33

departures .................................................................. 24, 26, 30, 31

drug conversion software program ...................................................... 6

drug offenses ......................................................... 3, 16, 18, 20, 21, 29

E

evaluation study ..................................................................... 10

ex post facto ......................................................................... 15

explosive materials ................................................................... 19

F

firearm offenses ................................................................ 16, 19, 21

food and drug offenses ............................................................ 23, 24

fraud, computer ................................................................... 13, 23

fraud, elderly victims ................................................................. 12

fraud, telemarketing .................................................................. 24
B-2

G

gangs ............................................................................... 21

guideline amendments ....................................................... 3, 4, 7, 8, 28

guidelines manuals .................................................................. 7, 8

H

hate crimes .......................................................................... 18

HelpLine ............................................................................. 3

HIV penalties ........................................................................ 12

I

immigration offenses ................................................................. 18

Internet site (USSC On-Line) ........................................................... 3

J

just punishment ...................................................................... 31

juvenile offenders .................................................................... 22

M

mandatory minimum penalties ......................................................... 9

manslaughter ........................................................................ 24

Mistretta v. U.S. .................................................................. 14, 15

money laundering .............................................................. 14, 21, 23

multiple counts ...................................................................... 26

O

obscenity offenses ................................................................... 18

offender characteristics ............................................................... 26

organizational defendants ................................................. 4, 10, 27, 28, 30

P

plea negotiations ..................................................................... 29

practice and procedure, rules of ........................................................ 31

prison resource utilization ............................................................ 11

public access ......................................................................... 28

public corruption .................................................................... 23

public hearings ..................................................................... 5, 6

R

rape, penalties for .................................................................... 12

relevant conduct ..................................................................... 25

revocation, probation and supervised release ........................................... 17

role in the offense .................................................................... 17
B-3

S

sentences imposed ................................................................... 29

Sentencing Reform Act ............................................................... 25

statistics, sourcebook of ................................................................ 8

statutory penalties project .............................................................. 9

substantial assistance to government ............................................... 24, 31

T

training .............................................................................. 6

V

vandalism ........................................................................... 13

violent crimes ................................................................ 3, 16, 21, 29

W

white collar crime .................................................................... 22