&

A Guide To

PUBLICATIONS

RESOURCES

April 1997

Richard P. Conaboy

Chairman

Michael S. Gelacak

Vice Chairman

Michael Goldsmith

Vice Chairman

Wayne A. Budd

Commissioner

Deanell R. Tacha

Commissioner

Michael J. Gaines

Ex-officio

Mary Frances Harkenrider

Ex-officio
John H. Kramer

Staff Director

Paul K. Martin

Deputy Staff Director

John R. Steer

General Counsel

Sharon O. Henegan

Director of Training and Technical Assistance

Susan Katzenelson

Director of Policy Analysis

Elizabeth A. McGrath

Director of Monitoring

Timothy B. McGrath

Executive Assistant to the Chairman

Donald A. Purdy, Jr.

Chief Deputy General Counsel

Jonathan J. Wroblewski

Legislative Counsel

Susan L. Winarsky

Deputy Director of Training and Technical Assistance
TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ............................................. v

PUBLICATION AND RESOURCE AVAILABILITY ................. vi

INFORMATION RESOURCES ................................... 1

HelpLine ............................................... 1

Internet Site – USSC OnLine ............................... 1

Video and Audio Tapes .................................... 1

Newsclips, Public Comment, and Official Records ................ 2

Library Resources ........................................ 4

Software and Training ..................................... 4

COMMISSION PUBLICATIONS ................................. 5

Annual Publications ...................................... 5

Reports to Congress ...................................... 7

Legal Briefs ........................................... 13

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

Staff Discussion Papers – Simplification Project ................ 26

Other Reports and Publications ............................. 29

COMMISSION DATA ........................................ 35

Monitoring Datasets ..................................... 35

Historical Datasets ...................................... 42

Special Study Datasets ................................... 43
Publications & Resources v

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: (A) to establish a research and development program; (B) to

provide a clearinghouse and information center for the collection, preparation, and

dissemination of information on federal sentencing practice; and (C) 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. Go to:

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.
Publications & Resources v

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 1 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 v 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 Communications

One Columbus Circle, N.E.

Room 2-500, South Lobby

Washington, D.C. 20002-8002
Publications & Resources 1

INFORMATION RESOURCES

HelpLine

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.

HelpLine (202) 273-4545

Internet Site (USSC OnLine)

Users visiting the Commission’s web site (USSC OnLine) at the address

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

materials. USSC OnLine is organized into ten categories: what’s new, general

information, publications, guidelines manuals and amendments, federal sentencing

statistics by state, reports to Congress, guideline training and education, links to

other federal judicial agencies, state sentencing commissions, and employment

opportunities. 

Video and Audio Tapes

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

SC-Loan.

These two collections of ten video tapes 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.
 2 United States Sentencing Commission

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 Legal and Training staffs

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.

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.

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.
Publications & Resources 3

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.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

DATE LOCATION TOPIC

4/15/86 Washington, DC Offense Seriousness

5/22/86 Washington, DC Prior Criminal Record

6/10/86 Washington, DC Organizational Guidelines

7/15/86 Washington, DC Sentencing Options (no transcript)

9/23/86 Washington, DC Plea Agreements (no transcript)

10/17/86 Chicago, IL Individual Guidelines

10/21/86 New York, NY Individual Guidelines

10/29/86 Atlanta, GA Individual Guidelines

11/5/86 Denver, CO Individual Guidelines

11/18/86 San Francisco, CA Individual Guidelines

12/2-3/86 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

2/17/87 Washington, DC Capital Punishment

3/11-12/87 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

3/22/88 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines (no transcript)

10/11/88 New York, NY Organizational Guidelines

12/2/88 Pasadena, CA Organizational Guidelines

4/7/89 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

2/14/90 Washington, DC Organizational Guidelines

3/15/90 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

12/13/90 Washington, DC Organizational Guidelines
 4 United States Sentencing Commission

3/5/91 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

2/25/92 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

3/22/93 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

11/9/93 Washington, DC Cocaine and Sentencing Policy

3/24/94 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

3/14/95 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

3/11/96 Washington, DC Individual Guidelines

8/12/96 Denver, CO Guideline Simplification

3/18/97 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.

Software and Training

Software and training materials assist practitioners with guideline application. 

USSC OnLine

ASSYST (Applied Sentencing System) is a software package developed by the

Sentencing Commission as an aid to guideline application. This software helps users

calculate the guideline sentencing range and contains applicable case law and other

help functions. The most recent version, ASSYST 2.1, provides increased flexibility

to move through the guideline application process, allows for multi-user access on a

local area network, and offers pull-down menus that have a “WindowsTM-like”

appearance. Because of resource considerations, ASSYST 2.1 will be the last

version of the program.

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

Commission’s training staff are available to the public.
Publications & Resources 5

COMMISSION PUBLICATIONS

Annual Publications

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

immediately previous amendment cycle.

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.
 6 United States Sentencing Commission

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).

2 volumes.

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

and Business); RDL.

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

USSC OnLine; SC-Request; RDL.

The Commission’s Annual Reports have increased in size and coverage since being

introduced in 1986. They report on Commission activities and research data

covering the fiscal year ending just prior to publication. They include a Commission

overview, discussion of recent amendments to the sentencing guidelines and current

legal issues, and (from 1988-1995) extensive data on sentencing guideline

application in the form of tables and graphics.

Annual Report (1986 - present).

USSC OnLine; SC-Request; SC-Inspect; RDL.
Publications & Resources 7

Sourcebook of Sentencing Statistics (1996).

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, additional

explanatory information on certain aspects of the guidelines, and an analysis of the

expected effects of the guidelines and related legislation on federal correctional

resource requirements.

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. The Sentencing Reform Act

of 1984 directed that the Commission, “[n]ot later than two years after the initial set

of guidelines promulgated under subsection (a) goes into effect, and thereafter

whenever possible, shall recommend to the Congress that it raise or lower the grades,

or otherwise modify the maximum penalties, of those offenses for which such an

adjustment appears appropriate.” 28 U.S.C. § 994(r).

Responding to that directive, this report is organized into three sections. The first,

Statutory Compilation One, organizes federal statutes into 18 generic crime groups

by title and section of the U.S. Code. Statutory Compilation Two organizes the
 8 United States Sentencing Commission

statutes into 18 generic crime groups according to the maximum penalty contained

in each statute. Statutory Compilation Three 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
Publications & Resources 9

significant estimated effects. Chapter One discusses Commission procedures in

developing the organizational guidelines. Chapter 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.

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 to reflect sentencing under

a guidelines system more accurately, and the listing therefore is based 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 for which complete guideline information was available. Factors

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

sentencing range.

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 (probation officers, federal defenders, private defense

counsel, and prosecutors) 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.
 10 United States Sentencing Commission

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).

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 regarding

the maximum utilization of prison resources. The report 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.
Publications & Resources 11

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 victimrelated guideline adjustments for fraud offenses against older victims. 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
 12 United States Sentencing Commission

(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 on federal territory. The report

discusses the operation of the relevant sentencing guidelines, compares federal and

state penalties for sexual assault, analyzes Sentencing Commission sexual abuse

data, and analyzes public comment and expert opinion on pertinent issues.

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.
Publications & Resources 13

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 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.

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) a “pragmatic, flexible”

approach to separation of powers analysis was appropriate in this case because the

structure of the Commission was not violative of separation of powers provisions in

the Constitutional text and did not involve any congressional self-aggrandizement;

(2) assigning the Commission to the Judicial Branch to safeguard its independence

does not entail a violation of separation of powers because the functions of neither

the Executive nor the Judicial Branches are disrupted by such a delegation; (3) the

mixed composition of the Commission of three judges and four non-judges 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) the doctrine of separation of powers is not

disturbed by the removal powers granted to the President because it in no way

threatens 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

that (2) the Commission had provided an appropriate statement of reasons for its

guidelines and policy statements. The Commission illustrated the reasons why the
 14 United States Sentencing Commission

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 given the general inapplicability of the APA, it need only

support its guideline decisions with a “report [to Congress] stating the reasons for the

Commission’s recommendations.” Pub. L. 98-473, § 235(a)(1)(B)(ii)(I). See also

28 U.S.C. § 994(p), relating to a statement of the reasons for any guideline

amendments.

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) “[t]he

federal sentencing guidelines do not reclassify substantive crimes but are based on

statutory offense categories.” United States v. Bader, 956 F.2d 708, 709 (7th Cir.

1992). The brief raised several legal and policy problems that result when guideline

amendments are subjected to ex post facto restrictions.
Publications & Resources 15

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 out of the Northern District of Georgia, the defendant moved to

invalidate the United States Sentencing Commission and the Sentencing Guidelines

on separation of powers grounds. The defendant contended that the Supreme Court

decision in Mistretta v. United States only resolved 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

it has strictly implemented the Act as Congress and the Supreme Court had intended

and, in doing so, has not violated the separation of powers doctrine. The

Commission specifically 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 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”) during each

guideline amendment cycle 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 §4B1.3 (Criminal Livelihood),

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).
 16 United States Sentencing Commission

SC-Loan; RDL.

The Career Offender Guidelines Working Group examined questions about the

career offender guidelines (§§4B1.1 and 4B1.2) arising from the Commission’s

survey of “Train the Trainer” participants and hotline calls received by the

Commission’s Office of Training and Technical Assistance. The working group also

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

(e.g., whether a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) was a “crime of violence” for

career offender purposes). 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 pre-guidelines 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.

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, monitoring 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 §2K2.1 to cover violations of 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). After
Publications & Resources 17

examining certain violent offenses, the group proposed changes to the murder-forhire 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 prepared for its task by reviewing

existing policy statements, relevant literature, legislative history, statistical data

pertaining to probation and supervised release, recommendations from the

Department of Justice, information from the Commission’s Technical Assistance

Service, 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 pre-sentencing-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.

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

§3B1.1 (Aggravating Role) (particularly the organizer-leader-supervisor-manager

distinction and the “otherwise extensive” provision) and §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, monitoring data, case files, appellate case law, and departure cases.
 18 United States Sentencing Commission

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 in Chapter Two, Part G (Offenses Involving

Prostitution, Sexual Exploitation of Minors, and Obscenity) and Part H (Civil

Rights). The report contains a collection of relevant statutes, discusses the

legislative history, digests data from the Commission’s Monitoring Office case files,

and discusses court decisions. The report also reviews guideline application issues

originating from hotline calls and public comment on proposed guideline

amendments. The group proposed that a specific offense characteristic for use of

force or incapacitation because of drugs or alcohol be added to §§2G1.1 and 2G1.2,

and that §2G2.1 address the age of the victim and any supervisory or custodial

control by the defendant. The group also proposed new guidelines to address

trafficking in materials that involve sexual exploitation of minors as well as

trafficking in other obscene materials. Additional proposed guidelines under section

2H would address offenses involving interference with civil rights or cases in which

the offense was motivated by the victim’s race, color, religion, alienage, or national

origin.

Aliens Working Group Report (October 18, 1990).

SC-Loan; RDL.

The working group studied guidelines §§2L1.1, 2L2.1, and 2L2.3, pertaining to

violations of immigration, naturalization, and passport laws. 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. The report sets forth proposed tables along with explanatory

commentary and suggests that the use of such tables would make it feasible to group

these offenses under §3D1.2.
Publications & Resources 19

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 O/VII (November 20, 1990).

SC-Loan; RDL.

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 monitoring 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 how 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 monitoring data, hotline reports, appellate court decisions, data

provided by the FBI about bank robbery statistics nationwide, 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

monitoring data, case files, and appellate decisions and by soliciting input from
 20 United States Sentencing Commission

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 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 on problems in

application and case law, asking whether any changes were needed in the structure

of the guideline, the language of the guideline and related commentary, or the manner

in which the Commission trains and educates the criminal justice community about

its application.

During 1991, the working 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.

Criminal History Working Group Report: Category O, Category VII, Career

Offender (October 17, 1991). 

SC-Loan; RDL.

This working group examined two issues: possible modification of criminal history

categories by adding a Category 0 and/or Category VII and consideration of 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). 
Publications & Resources 21

SC-Loan; RDL.

During the last quarter of calendar year 1990, the Judicial Conference of the United

States and the Alternatives to Imprisonment Project chaired by Commissioner Helen

G. Corrothers submitted detailed 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.

The 101st Congress directed the Sentencing Commission to amend existing

guidelines for offenses involving sexual crimes against children if the Commission

determined that current penalties were inadequate. In response to this mandate, the

child sex offense working group conducted a study of sentences in sexual abuse,

kidnapping, and pornography cases, concentrating on three issues: adequacy of the

current two-level enhancement in §2A3.1 when the victim is a corrections employee,

the scope of the enhancement when a custodial relationship exists between defendant

and victim, and the possibility of moving toward a more real-offense system for the

sexual assault guidelines, §§2A3.2 and 2A3.4, through cross references.

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 §1B1.3 (Relevant Conduct), §3B1.2 (Mitigating Role in the Offense),

§2D1.1 (Drug Trafficking Offenses), and §2D1.8 (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 practice

more precisely under these guidelines. The group profiled drug defendants to

identify offense characteristics that relate to mitigating role adjustments. The group

analyzed the impact of prosecutorial selection of 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.
 22 United States Sentencing Commission

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

SC-Loan; RDL.

This report addresses public comment questioning 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 lay the groundwork for an

examination of issues pertinent to incorporating gang membership and gang crime as

sentencing factors.

The group conducted a systematic study of Chapter Two Part A guidelines (Offenses

Against the Person) and the revised firearm guidelines. The study included computer

analyses of data drawn from case files submitted to the Commission after each

sentencing in a guideline case, an analysis of published court opinions dealing with

the Chapter Two Part A guidelines and the revised firearm guidelines, an

examination of emerging questions and problems directed to the Commission’s

Technical Assistance Service, 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).
Publications & Resources 23

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 concerning the drug

and role guidelines, with the primary objective of identifying circuit court conflicts

over guideline application.

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

Abuse Act, conducted empirical research using the Commission’s Monitoring

database, examined Technical Assistance Service (hotline) data, 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” (28 U.S.C. § 995(a)(19)). 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 (Parts 2B,

2F, 2R, and 2T, respectively). 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
 24 United States Sentencing Commission

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. 

The group’s research base included monitoring data, case law, TAS and attorney

hotline calls, and comments provided by outside groups, such as the Probation

Officers Advisory Group.

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

SC-Loan; RDL.

The Computer Fraud Working Group studied the effectiveness of the fraud (§2F1.1)

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 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 states that one

such guideline, covering trespass, might fit better than the fraud guideline for

offenses that involve illegally accessing a government computer. 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, charged with examining sentencing practices

under the public corruption guidelines, drew on a variety of sources in drafting its

report: relevant statutes and common law principles, legislative history of pertinent

statutes, pending legislation, interviews and discussions with individuals in the

criminal justice system, public comment, hotline calls, criminal justice literature,

case law, monitoring data, and a detailed review of approximately 300 public

corruption cases. The review identified a number of topics involving application of
Publications & Resources 25

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

covered by §2N2.1. The group’s preliminary report includes: (1) an overview of

§2N2.1 and the most commonly prosecuted offenses sentenced under it; (2) an

analysis of food and drug cases involving individuals sentenced under §2N2.1 during

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

organizational defendants sentenced under pre-guidelines law; (4) an analysis of

significant application issues under §2N2.1; and (5) a description of additional

research the group planned to undertake during fiscal year 1994.

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

USSC OnLine; RDL.

This follow-up to an October 1992 report (see p. 17) 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 (see above) includes an overview of §2N2.1

and the most commonly prosecuted crimes sentenced under it, provides a description

and analysis of food and drug cases involving individuals sentenced under §2N2.1 in

fiscal years 1991-93, and describes food and drug cases involving organizational

defendants sentenced under pre-guidelines law. The report reviews organizational

food and drug cases sentenced under Chapter Eight (Sentencing of Organizations),

examines relevant case law, and provides an analysis of application issues involving

individual defendants under §2N2.1.
 26 United States Sentencing Commission

Staff Discussion Papers – Simplification Project

The Sentencing Reform Act

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. Among

these constraints is the so-called “25 percent rule.” The paper also generally

describes the manner in which Congress directed the Commission to consider a

variety of identified offense and offender characteristics and to achieve desired levels

of severity for particular categories of defendants about which Congress expressed

special concern (e.g., career offenders). Finally, the paper enumerates congressional

directives enacted subsequent to the SRA that further limit Commission amendment

discretion and exert Congress’s direct influence over the levels of severity and

specificity reflected in the guidelines for many offenses.

Relevant Conduct

USSC OnLine; RDL.

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

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
Publications & Resources 27

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

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

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 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

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.
 28 United States Sentencing Commission

Multiple Counts

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

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

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.
Publications & Resources 29

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.

Most Frequently Asked Questions About the Sentencing Guidelines (1988-1994).

(Individual volumes)

USSC OnLine; SC-Request; SC-Inspect; RDL.

These indexed compilations comprise selected questions frequently asked about the

operation of the sentencing guidelines and corresponding answers. The most recent

edition incorporates all of the preceding volumes and reflects necessary changes due

to amendments to the Guidelines Manual.

Volumes I & II (November 30, 1988)

Volume III (March 1, 1990)

Volume IV (December 1, 1990)

Volume V (March 1, 1992)

Sixth Edition (December 1, 1992)

Seventh Edition (May 1994)

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
 30 United States Sentencing Commission

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.

Amendment Highlights (1989-1996).

(Individual years)

SC-Request; RDL.

Prepared by the Commission training staff, 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 legal staff 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.
Publications & Resources 31

The primary purposes of this Commissioner-led project were to explore communitybased 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. 

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

SC-Request; 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.

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
 32 United States Sentencing Commission

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 strong compliance

programs and adopt crime-controlling measures. Participants included federal

enforcement officials, representatives of corporations, private attorneys, and

academics 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
Publications & Resources 33

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 selected federal offenses: drug

trafficking, bank robbery, immigration offenses, and fraud.

Supreme Court Cases and Circuit Conflicts.

SC-Request; RDL.
 34 United States Sentencing Commission

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.

Issues currently available include: February 1995, June 1995, January 1996, and

August 1996.

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. 

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.

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/home/html.
Publications & Resources 35

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 Office of Monitoring enters 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.

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,
 36 United States Sentencing Commission

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).
Publications & Resources 37

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 (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.
 38 United States Sentencing Commission

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).

Information available in this dataset includes sentence information collected from the

J&C submitted by the court, background information collected from the PSR, and indepth 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 indepth 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 indepth guideline information collected from the PSR and the report on the sentencing

hearing.
Publications & Resources 39

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

hearing.

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

ICPSR.

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 indepth 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.
 40 United States Sentencing Commission

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 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 4 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
Publications & Resources 41

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.

This dataset includes 6,078 appeals defendants 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 appeals defendants 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 appeals defendants 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.
 42 United States Sentencing Commission

This dataset includes 6,710 appeals defendants 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.

Historical Datasets

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.
Publications & Resources 43

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 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.
The FPSSIS data used for the mandatory minimum 3

study include all 267,178 cases sentenced between

Januar y 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 4

data set for the fiscal year 1990 (MONFY90), with

29,011 defendants sentenced between October 1,

1989, and September 30, 1990.

44 United States Sentencing Commission

In particular, the sample dataset was developed to supplement the FPSSIS and 3

Commission monitoring data with pertinent preconviction information and to allow 4

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 Short-Term
Publications & Resources 45

Impacts on Disparity in Sentencing, Use of Incarceration, and 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 pre-guideline 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).
 46 United States Sentencing Commission

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’s Monitoring Office undertook a special data collection effort that

produced a file identifying the particular type of 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 pre-guidelines 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 pre-guidelines or guidelines

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

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

870 guidelines); the heroin distribution sample 1,454 cases (530 pre-guidelines and

924 guidelines); and the cocaine distribution sample 1,710 cases (328 pre-guidelines

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.
Publications & Resources 47

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.

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.