Alternative Sentencing in the 

Federal Criminal Justice System 

UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION
United States Sentencing Commission

One Columbus Circle, N.E.

Washington, DC 20002

www.ussc.gov

Ricardo H. Hinojosa

Acting Chair

Ruben Castillo

Vice Chair

William K. Sessions III

Vice Chair

William B. Carr, Jr.

Vice Chair

Beryl A. Howell

Commissioner

Dabney L. Friedrich

Commissioner

Edward F. Reilly, Jr.

Ex Officio

Jonathan J. Wroblewski

Ex Officio

Judith W. Sheon

Staff Director

Glenn R. Schmitt

Director

Office of Research and Data

Louis Reedt

Acting Deputy Director

Office of Research and Data

January 2009
Alternative Sentencing in the

Federal Criminal Justice System

Courtney Semisch, Ph.D.

Senior Research Associate

Office of Research and Data

During the past ten years, alternatives to incarceration1 have been

imposed for between 15 and 25 percent of federal offenders. The

true extent to which courts impose these alternatives is not

apparent in this trend, however, because of the unique

composition of the federal sentencing population. Specifically, a

large proportion of non-citizen federal offenders (who often are

ineligible for alternative sentences) are imprisoned. This paper

analyzes alternative sentences for federal offenders and,

specifically, United States citizens sentenced under various types

of alternatives. This analysis describes current federal sentencing

policy governing alternative sentences and examines offenders

with alternative sentences using the United States Sentencing

Commission’s data.2 An analysis of factors associated with

alternative sentences imposed for eligible offenders provides

insight into considerations made by federal sentencing courts in

determining whether to impose alternatives.

Background

A number of correctional issues that arose during the 1980s

increased interest in alternative sanctions in the criminal justice

system at both the federal and state level. Across the United

States, increased use of probation sentences for felony offenders

was burdening under-funded and under-staffed probation

departments.3 At the same time, more than half of the states were

under court order or facing court order to reduce prison crowding.4

Criticism of indeterminate sentences also was increasing.5 In

addition, mandatory penalties were changing the composition of

the incarcerated population by substantially increasing the number

of incarcerated low-level drug offenders.6

Increasingly, criminal justice professionals have argued that

dwindling prison space should be reserved for the most serious

and dangerous offenders, necessitating a reconsideration of

alternative sanctions for first-time and nonviolent offenders. The

appeal of alternatives to incarceration has continued to increase in

the wake of reports of the ever-growing prison population. As of

2008, more than one in every 100 adults are incarcerated in the

United States.7 That large, and still growing, population cost the

states more than $49 billion in 2007.8 In addition to the monetary

Increasingly, criminal

justice professionals have

argued that dwindling

prison space should be

reserved for the most

serious and dangerous

offenders, necessitating a

reconsideration of

alternative sanctions for

first-time and nonviolent

offenders.
2

United States Sentencing Commission

costs, social costs of imprisonment include the separation of

families, isolation from the community, and transitional difficulties

when offenders re-enter the community.

In response to both the increasing monetary and social costs of

incarceration, a growing number of states have begun

implementing money-saving, public safety-oriented solutions.9

These solutions include diverting low-risk offenders from prison,

implementing alternative sanctions, and shortening prison terms.

Federal criminal courts have used these tools over the years

primarily for fraud and white collar offenders and, most importantly,

for United States citizens.

Federal Sentencing Policy

Federal statutes and the United States sentencing guidelines

provide the foundation for federal sentencing. The Sentencing

Reform Act of 1984 (the “Act”)10 requires that the federal

sentencing guidelines “reflect the general appropriateness of

imposing a sentence other than imprisonment in cases in which

the defendant is a first offender who has not been convicted of a

crime of violence or an otherwise serious offense....” [Emphasis

added]11 The Act established probation as an actual sentencing

option, rather than an instrument used in suspending prison

sentences.12 Four years later, the Anti-Drug Abuse Amendment

Act of 198813 authorized the use of home detention and electronic

monitoring for offenders sentenced to probation and supervised

release.14 The Commission incorporated these policies into the

guidelines with other probation and intermediate confinement

options for less serious and first-time offenders.

Federal statutes and the sentencing guidelines both limit offender

eligibility for probation sentences.15 Defendants found guilty of a

federal offense are eligible for a term of probation unless (1) the

individual is convicted of a Class A or Class B felony,16

(2) probation has been expressly precluded for the offense, or (3)

the defendant is sentenced at the same time to a sentence of

imprisonment for any offense.

The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 further excludes probation for

some offenders. Specifically, the Act directs that the guidelines

provide for substantial imprisonment terms for defendants with two

or more prior felonies, offenses that constitute a pattern of criminal

conduct, offenders who manage or supervise racketeering

conspiracies, offenders who commit a crime of violence while

under supervision, and drug offenses involving substantial

quantities.17 The conditions of probation, both mandatory18 and

discretionary,19 also are stipulated by federal statute and the

sentencing guidelines. Confinement conditions are among

discretionary special conditions of probation provided for by the

guidelines.20 These conditions include community confinement

(residence in a community treatment center, halfway house, or

similar facility), home detention, and intermittent confinement

(custody for specified intervals of time).

Determining a Guideline Sentence

The guidelines’ sentencing table (see Guidelines Manual, Chapter

Five, Part A) provides sentencing ranges based on an offender’s

The Sentencing Reform Act

of 1984 requires that the

federal sentencing

guidelines “reflect the

general appropriateness of

imposing a sentence other

than imprisonment in cases

in which the defendant is a

first offender who has not

been convicted of a crime

of violence or an otherwise

serious offense....”
3

Alternative Sentencing in the Federal Criminal Justice System

offense level and Criminal History Category.21 The sentencing

table is subdivided into four zones (A, B, C, and D) that determine

confinement options for each sentencing range.22 Sentencing

ranges in Zone A are from zero to six months of confinement. At

the sentencing court’s discretion, the zero-to-six month range may

consist of probation only (zero months of confinement), probation

with confinement, prison with community confinement, or

imprisonment.

Zone B sentences include confinement terms ranging from one to

12 months. Zone B allows probation terms to be substituted for

imprisonment, provided that the probation term includes

confinement conditions (community confinement, intermittent

confinement, or home detention).23 For Zone B offenders

sentenced to prison, however, a minimum of one month of the total

term imposed must be imprisonment. The remainder of the

sentence also may be imprisonment, or a substitution of probation

that includes community confinement. Any Zone B term of

probation without a term of confinement necessarily constitutes a

departure from the sentencing guidelines or a non-guideline

sentence.24

Zone C of the sentencing table provides ranges of a minimum of

eight to a maximum of 16 months. The guidelines require that

Zone C sentences include a term of imprisonment equivalent to at

least half of the minimum of the range. The remaining half of the

term requires supervised release with conditions of community

confinement.25 Alternatively, the court has the option of imposing a

full prison term for Zone C offenders. Any sentence with no term

of confinement for offenders in Zone C necessarily constitutes a

departure from the sentencing guidelines or a non-guideline

sentence.

Finally, sentences in Zone D of the sentencing table require a term

of imprisonment ranging from one year to life. Any sentence of

probation or community confinement for Zone D offenders

necessarily constitutes a departure from the sentencing guidelines

or a non-guideline sentence.

Table 126 shows the number of offenders sentenced in each of the

four sentencing table zones in fiscal year 2007.27 Only a small

proportion of federal offenders are sentenced in Zones A (7.9%)

and B (6.8%) and are eligible for non-prison sentences. Similarly,

a small proportion of offenders (6.8%) are in Zone C of the

sentencing table and eligible for a prison term followed by

community confinement. Most federal offenders (78.5%) are

sentenced in Zone D and are required to serve prison terms.

Despite the availability of alternative sentencing options for nearly

one-fourth of federal offenders, federal courts most often impose

prison for offenders in each of the sentencing table zones. As

shown in Table 2,28 nearly half (48.4%) of Zone A offenders are

sentenced to prison only, and more than one-half of both Zone B

(58.4%) and Zone C (66.4%) offenders are sentenced to prison

only. As would be expected, the overwhelming majority of Zone D

offenders (94.6%) are sentenced to prison.

ZONE NUMBER PERCENT

TOTAL 63,906 100.0

ZONE A 5,054 7.9

ZONE B 4,333 6.8

ZONE C 4,384 6.8

ZONE D 50,135 78.5

Table 1

Offenders in Each

Sentencing Table Zone

Fiscal Year 2007

Despite the availability of

alternative sentencing

options for nearly

one-fourth of federal

offenders, federal courts

most often impose prison

for offenders in each of the

sentencing table zones.
4

United States Sentencing Commission

The Citizenship Effect

Closer examination of offenders sentenced in Zones A, B, and C

reveals an important aspect of the federal criminal caseload as

well as federal detention policies regarding criminal aliens. The

federal sentencing caseload is composed of a substantial

proportion of non-United States citizens. In fiscal year 2007, more

than one-third (37.4%) of offenders are non-citizens, the

overwhelming majority of whom are illegal aliens.29 Illegal aliens

are subject to deportation from the United States.30 The Bureau of

Prisons assigns deportable aliens to confinement at their second

highest custody level, which requires a normal level of institutional

supervision and prohibits work details or other programs outside

the secure perimeter of the institution.31

ZONE A ZONE B ZONE C ZONE D

TOTAL NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER Percent Number Percent

TOTAL 63,753 4,990 100.0 4,314 100.0 4,371 100.0 50,078 100.0

U.S. CITIZEN 40,830 2,810 56.3 2,371 55.0 2,151 49.2 33,498 66.9

NON-U.S.

CITIZEN 22,923 2,180 43.7 1,943 45.0 2,220 50.8 16,580 33.1

Table 3

Citizenship Status of Offenders in Each Sentencing Table Zone

Fiscal Year 2007

Because of these sentencing policies, rates of alternative

sentences are substantially different for United States citizen and

non-citizen offenders.32 Table 333 shows the citizenship status of

offenders in each of the four sentencing table zones; offenders in

Zones A, B, and C are approximately equally divided among

United States citizens and non-citizens.34 Despite this fairly equal

representation of non-citizens in each sentencing table zone,

non-citizens rarely are sentenced to alternatives, for the reasons

stated above. Table 435 shows that the majority of non-citizens in

Zones A (86.3%), B (89.8%), and C (94.3%) are sentenced to

prison.

In contrast, United States citizens are substantially more likely to

receive alternative sentences in Zones A, B, and C. See Table

5.36 Three-quarters (75.5%) of United States citizens in Zone A

are sentenced to probation. The majority of Zone B and C

ZONE PRISON ONLY PRISON/COMMUNITY SPLIT PROBATION AND

CONFINEMENT PROBATION ONLY

TOTAL NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT

TOTAL 63,767 55,211 86.5 2,083 3.3 2,530 4.0 3,943 6.2

ZONE A 4,970 2,406 48.4 32 0.6 157 3.2 2,375 47.8

ZONE B 4,322 2,525 58.4 217 5.0 1,085 25.1 495 11.5

ZONE C 4,376 2,905 66.4 762 17.4 392 9.0 317 7.2

ZONE D 50,099 47,375 94.6 1,072 2.1 896 1.8 756 1.5

Table 2

Sentence Imposed for Offenders in Each Sentencing Table Zone

Fiscal Year 2007
5

Alternative Sentencing in the Federal Criminal Justice System

offenders also are sentenced to available alternatives. A large

proportion (42.2%) of Zone B offenders are sentenced to probation

with confinement and an additional 17.1 percent, with departures

or non-guideline sentences, are sentenced to probation only.

Nearly one-third (32.1%) of Zone C offenders are sentenced to a

prison/community split and an additional 30.2 percent, with

departures or non-guideline sentences are sentenced to probation

and confinement (17.2%) and probation only (13.0%). Finally, as

would be expected, the vast majority (92.5%) of Zone D offenders

are sentenced to prison.

Trends in Sentence Types

The predominance of prison sentences has been consistent and

has been accompanied by slightly increasing rates over the past

ten years. In contrast, as Figure 137 shows, the proportion of

federal offenders sentenced to alternatives has remained low and

decreased slightly during the same time period. Prison rates have

increased ten percentage points since fiscal year 1997 from 75.4

percent to 85.3 percent.38 That increase corresponds to declines in

each of the other sentence categories, probation (13.1% to 7.7%),

probation with alternatives (7.1% to 3.9%), and prison with

alternatives (4.4% to 3.1%).

The decreasing trend in alternative sentences, again, is

attributable to the non-citizen offenders in the federal sentencing

ZONE PRISON ONLY PRISON/COMMUNITY SPLIT PROBATION AND

CONFINEMENT PROBATION ONLY

TOTAL NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT

TOTAL 22,898 22,081 96.4 169 0.7 173 0.8 475 2.1

ZONE A 2,166 1,870 86.3 1 0.1 12 0.6 283 13.1

ZONE B 1,941 1,743 89.8 25 1.3 86 4.4 87 4.5

ZONE C 2,218 2,092 94.3 70 3.2 21 1.0 35 1.6

ZONE D 16,573 16,376 98.8 73 0.4 54 0.3 70 0.4

Table 4

Sentence Imposed for Non-United States Citizen Offenders in Each Sentencing Table Zone

Fiscal Year 2007

ZONE PRISON ONLY PRISON/COMMUNITY SPLIT PROBATION AND

CONFINEMENT PROBATION ONLY

TOTAL NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT

TOTAL 40,720 33,022 81.1 1,907 4.7 2,351 5.8 3,440 8.4

ZONE A 2,744 497 18.1 31 1.1 145 5.3 2,071 75.5

ZONE B 2,362 771 32.6 191 8.1 996 42.2 404 17.1

ZONE C 2,145 808 37.7 688 32.1 370 17.2 279 13.0

ZONE D 33,469 30,946 92.5 997 3.0 840 2.5 686 2.1

Table 5

Sentence Imposed for United States Citizen Offenders in Each Sentencing Table Zone

Fiscal Year 2007

The predominance of

prison sentences has been

consistent and has been

accompanied by slightly

increasing rates over the

past ten years. In contrast,

as Figure 1 shows, the

proportion of federal

offenders sentenced to

alternatives has remained

low and decreased slightly

during the same time

period.
6

United States Sentencing Commission

population. As shown in Figure 2,39 United States citizen offenders

in Zone A consistently have been sentenced to probation at the

rate of about 75.0 percent from fiscal year 1997 through fiscal year

2007. The proportion of non-citizen offenders sentenced to

probation steadily has dropped during this same time period, from

approximately one-third (32.0%) in fiscal year 1997 to 13.1 percent

in fiscal year 2007. The trends are similar for offenders in Zones B
7

Alternative Sentencing in the Federal Criminal Justice System

and C of the sentencing table. Figure 340 shows that the rates of

probation with confinement options for United States citizens in

Zone B have remained somewhat constant, between 40 and 50

percent, and decreased slightly in recent years. Non-citizens in

Zone B, on the other hand, consistently have lower rates of

probation with confinement, and that rate notably has dropped

from 18.0 percent to 4.4 percent.

Figure 441 demonstrates the same trend, but with a narrower gap

between United States citizens and non-citizens in Zone C

sentenced to prison/community split. Between fiscal year 1997

and fiscal year 2007, consistently approximately one-third of

United States citizens have been sentenced to prison/community

split sentences. In contrast, the proportion of non-citizens in Zone

C with prison/community split sentences dropped from 13.0

percent in fiscal year 1997 to 3.2 percent in fiscal year 2007.42

Sentencing of United States Citizens

United States citizens are the focus of the remaining analyses

because they comprise the majority of federal offenders sentenced

to alternatives. The following sections examine and compare

United States citizen federal offenders sentenced to prison,

prison/community split, probation with confinement, and probation.

Offense Types

Offenders committing certain types of offenses more frequently

receive alternative sentences. Table 643 shows that larceny

offenders have the greatest likelihood of receiving alternative

sentences with nearly two-thirds (61.2%) sentenced to

prison/community split, probation with confinement, or probation.

Offenders convicted of fraud and other white collar offenses,44

while still primarily sentenced to prison, also more often are

Offenders committing

certain types of offenses

more frequently receive

alternative sentences.
8

United States Sentencing Commission

PRISON

ONLY

PRISON/

COMMUNITY SPLIT

PROBATION WITH

CONFINEMENT

PROBATION

ONLY

NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT

TOTAL 35,014 80.8 2,020 4.7 2,511 5.8 3,807 8.8

OFFENSE TYPE

Robbery 1,081 1,048 97.0 15 1.4 8 0.7 10 0.9

Drugs 17,592 16,206 92.1 538 3.1 332 1.9 516 2.9

Firearms 7,658 7,033 91.8 179 2.3 221 2.9 225 2.9

Larceny 1,308 508 38.8 72 5.5 228 17.4 500 38.2

Fraud 5,826 3,480 59.7 513 8.8 751 12.9 1,082 18.6

Non-Fraud White Collar 2,809 1,601 57.0 265 9.4 412 14.7 531 18.9

Immigration 1,827 1,304 71.4 228 12.5 136 7.4 159 8.7

Other 5,251 3,834 73.0 210 4.0 423 8.1 784 14.9

CRIMINAL HISTORY CATEGORY

I 18,417 12,283 66.4 1,347 7.3 1,813 9.8 2,974 16.5

II 4,500 3,844 85.4 178 4.0 240 5.3 238 5.3

III 5,937 5,367 90.4 222 3.7 190 3.2 158 2.7

IV 3,657 3,472 94.9 87 2.4 58 1.6 40 1.1

V 2,392 2,340 97.8 18 0.8 19 0.8 15 0.6

VI 5,817 5,716 98.3 55 1.0 31 0.5 15 0.3

Table 6

Selected Offense and Offender Characteristics for United States Citizen Federal Offenders

with Each Sentencing Option

Fiscal Year 2007
9

Alternative Sentencing in the Federal Criminal Justice System

sentenced to alternatives; approximately one-third of fraud and

white collar offenders are sentenced to prison alternatives. In

contrast, the overwhelming majority of offenders convicted of

robbery (97.0%), drug (92.1%), and firearms (91.8%) offenses are

sentenced to prison. See Table 6.

Criminal History

Criminal History Category, in combination with offense level,

determines an offender’s sentencing guideline range. Criminal

History Category I includes offenders with little or no prior

involvement with the criminal justice system. Criminal History

Category VI is composed of offenders with the most extensive and

serious criminal records.

Offenders in Criminal History Category I are sentenced to the four

sentencing options at the same rate as the overall federal

population. The majority (66.4%) of offenders in Criminal History

Category I are sentenced to prison, followed by probation (16.5%),

probation and confinement (9.8%), and prison/community split

(7.3%).

Offenders in the more serious Criminal History Categories are

even more likely to be sentenced to prison. The overwhelming

majority of offenders in Criminal History Category II (85.4%),

PRISON ONLY PRISON/COMMUNITY

SPLIT

PROBATION WITH

CONFINEMENT PROBATION ONLY

NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT

TOTAL 35,014 100.0 2,020 100.0 2,511 100.0 3,807 100.0

AVERAGE SENTENCE (MONTHS)

Prison 76 9 - - - -

Probation - - - - 39 33

Alternative - - - 6 - 6 - -

ALTERNATIVE TYPE

Home Confinement - - 1,494 74.0 2,259 90.0 - -

Community

Confinement - - 464 23.0 142 5.7 - -

Intermittent

Confinement - - 17 0.8 30 1.2 - -

Combination of

Alternatives - - 45 2.2 80 3.1 - -

MONETARY PENALTIES

No Monetary Penalty 24,959 71.5 1,005 49.9 929 37.1 1,335 35.1

Fine/Supervision Cost/

Restitution 9,950 28.5 1,010 50.1 1,575 62.9 2,465 64.9

MEDIAN MONETARY

PENALTY $6,000 $20,568 $11,591 $3,834

SENTENCE RELATIVE TO GUIDELINE RANGE

Within Range 21,447 61.6 813 40.5 1,103 44.6 2,252 61.4

Above Range 595 1.7 29 1.4 8 0.3 0 0.0

Govt.-Sponsored

Below Range 8,451 24.3 658 32.8 689 27.9 837 22.8

Other Below Range 4,300 12.4 507 25.3 672 27.2 577 15.7

Table 7

Sentences Imposed for United States Citizen Federal Offenders with Each Sentencing Option

Fiscal Year 2007

Offenders convicted of

fraud and other white

collar offenses, while still

primarily sentenced to

prison, also more often are

sentenced to alternatives;

approximately one-third of

fraud and white collar

offenders are sentenced to

prison alternatives.
10

United States Sentencing Commission

III (90.4%), IV (94.9%), V (97.8%), and VI (98.3%) are sentenced to

prison.

Sentences Imposed

Prison sentences account for 81.1 percent of sentences imposed

for United States citizens in fiscal year 2007. See Table 5. The

remaining sentences are probation (8.4%), probation with

confinement (5.8%), and prison split with community confinement

(4.7%). For United States citizens, the average prison sentence is

76 months. The average prison sentence for offenders sentenced

to prison/community split is nine months. See Table 7.45 Average

sentence lengths for the two categories of offenders sentenced to

probation are about three years; the average term for offenders

sentenced to probation only is 33 months, and the average for

offenders sentenced to probation with confinement is 39 months.

Home confinement is the most commonly imposed alternative

sentence. Three-quarters (74.0%) of offenders sentenced to

prison/community split are sentenced to home confinement. A

substantial proportion (23.0%) also are sentenced to community

confinement (i.e., residence in a community treatment center,

halfway house, or similar facility). Prison/community split

sentences average nine months of prison and six months of

alternative confinement. Nearly all (90.0%) offenders sentenced to

probation with confinement received home confinement. Probation

and confinement sentences average six months confinement and

39 months of overall probation.

Overall, monetary penalties (fine, cost of supervision, and/or

restitution) are imposed for approximately one-third (34.7%) of

United States citizen offenders in fiscal year 2007 and are more

commonly imposed for offenders sentenced to alternatives.

Two-thirds of offenders sentenced to probation (64.9%) and

offenders sentenced to probation with confinement (62.9%) also

have monetary penalties imposed.46 Half (50.1%) of offenders

sentenced to prison/community split are ordered to pay monetary

penalties. In contrast, fewer than one-third (28.5%) of offenders

sentenced to prison also are ordered to pay monetary penalties.

The median47 monetary penalties (for those offenders ordered to

pay them) range from $3,834 for offenders sentenced to probation,

to $20,568 for offenders sentenced to prison/community split.

Sentences Relative to the Guideline Range

More than half (59.7%) of sentences imposed on United States

citizens in fiscal year 2007 are within the guideline range. These

rates reflect the within-range rates for United States citizen

offenders sentenced to prison (61.6%) and probation (61.4%).

Offenders sentenced to community confinement, however, have

substantially lower rates of within-range sentences. Fewer than

half of offenders sentenced to prison/community split (40.5%) and

probation with confinement (44.6%) are sentenced within the

guideline range. The higher rates of downward departures and

non-guideline sentences primarily are responsible for the

difference. Rates of non-government sponsored downward

departures and non-guideline sentences are greater for offenders

sentenced to prison/community split (25.3%) and probation and

confinement (27.2%) compared to those sentenced to probation

(15.7%) and prison (12.4%).

Prison sentences account

for 81.1 percent of

sentences imposed for

United States citizens in

fiscal year 2007. The

remaining sentences are

probation (8.4%), probation

with confinement (5.8%),

and prison split with

community confinement

(4.7%).

More than half (59.7%) of

sentences imposed on

United States citizens in

fiscal year 2007 are within

the guideline range.
11

Alternative Sentencing in the Federal Criminal Justice System

Despite the different rates of downward departures and

non-guideline sentences among United States citizen offenders

sentenced to each of the four options, the reasons cited by the

courts for the below-range sentences are the same, and most

often cite the factors established by Congress in the Sentencing

Reform Act of 1984 as those to be considered in imposing a

sentence.48 The three most commonly cited reasons for

non-government sponsored below-range sentences for each of

the four groups are— nature and circumstances of the offense

and the history and characteristics of the defendant; to reflect the

seriousness of the offense/to promote respect for the law/to

provide just punishment for the offense; and to afford adequate

deterrence to criminal conduct.

Additional sentencing factors identified by Congress round out the

most frequently cited reasons courts give for imposing

below-range sentences: to protect the public from further crimes

of the defendant; to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities

among defendants with similar records who have been found

guilty of similar conduct; to provide the defendant with needed

educational or vocational training, medical care, or other

correctional treatment in the most effective manner; and to provide

restitution to any victims of the offense.

Offender Characteristics

The demographic characteristics of individual offenders are

excluded for consideration at sentencing; but there is some

variation in the imposition of alternative sentences for some

groups.49 Nearly equal proportions of White (38.7%) and Black

(37.6%) United States citizen offenders are sentenced to prison.

White offenders comprise approximately half of those sentenced

to each of the alternative categories (ranging from 48.6% to

54.5%) while the proportion of Black offenders is approximately

one-fourth (ranging from 24.3% to 28.3%). Among United States

citizens, those with Hispanic backgrounds account for a smaller

proportion (19.3%) of offenders sentenced to prison, as well as

PRISON ONLY PRISON/COMMUNITY

SPLIT

PROBATION WITH

CONFINEMENT PROBATION ONLY

NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT

TOTAL 35,014 100.0 2,020 100.0 2,511 100.0 3,807 100.0

RACE

White 13,520 38.7 982 48.6 1,290 51.5 2,047 54.5

Black 13,161 37.6 491 24.3 709 28.3 997 26.6

Hispanic 6,745 19.3 441 21.8 347 13.9 457 12.2

Other 1,551 4.4 105 5.2 158 6.3 253 6.7

GENDER

Male 30,684 87.6 1,397 69.2 1,642 65.4 2,361 62.1

Female 4,328 12.4 623 30.8 869 34.6 1,440 37.9

AVERAGE AGE

35 37 40 39

Table 8

United States Citizen Federal Offenders with Each Sentencing Option

Fiscal Year 2007

Nearly equal proportions of

White (38.7%) and Black

(37.6%) United States

citizen offenders are

sentenced to prison.
12

United States Sentencing Commission

those sentenced to each of the alternative categories (ranging from

12.2% to 21.8%). See Table 8.50

While male offenders make up the vast majority (87.6%) of

imprisoned offenders, men account for only two-thirds of offenders

sentenced to any of the three alternatives to prison (ranging from

62.1% of probation only to 69.2% of prison/community split).

Offenders sentenced to prison also are younger than offenders

sentenced to one of the three alternatives. The average age of

federal offenders sentenced to prison is 35 years, compared to 37

years for prison/community split, 40 years for probation with

confinement, and 39 years for probation.

Which Eligible Offenders are Sentenced to Alternatives?

Sentencing courts generally do not provide specific, written

reasons for imposing sentences within the guideline range.51

Because of this, the question of why courts impose alternative

sentences for some eligible offenders but not others cannot

definitively be answered. However, it is possible to identify which

eligible offenders receive alternatives, thereby suggesting factors

considered by sentencing courts when deciding whether to impose

alternatives to incarceration. This analysis identifies a number of

factors associated with offenders receiving alternatives,

distinguishing offenders who receive alternative sentences from

those who do not.

The analysis that follows demonstrates that sentencing zone

ultimately determines whether offenders are sentenced to

alternatives. Specifically, guideline offense level and Criminal

History Category, alone or in combination, are the principal factors

determining whether an offender receives an alternative sentence.

Some additional guideline and demographic characteristics also

are associated with offenders’ receipt of an alternative sentence;

however, these factors also are associated with one or both of the

zone determinants.

In fiscal year 2007, 5,378 United States citizens were sentenced

within the sentencing guideline range and were located in Zones A,

B, or C. Limiting analysis to within-range sentences allows a clear

comparison of offenders who are sentenced according to their

guideline calculation and eligible for an alternative sentence,

independent of a government motion or other departure or

variance. Because statutory mandatory minimum sentences

confound an offender’s eligibility for alternatives, offenders subject

to statutory mandatory minimums also were excluded for this

analysis.52 The following analysis compares offenders sentenced

to the non-incarceration (or reduced incarceration) alternatives

available in their respective zones to offenders with sentences of

confinement in excess of available alternatives.53

The Association of Sentencing Zone and Alternative Sentences54

As explained previously, guideline offense level and Criminal

History Category combine to determine an offender’s final

sentencing range and the zone on the sentencing table in which

that range is located. These factors also determine whether

eligible offenders receive alternative sentences. Table 955 shows

that offenders sentenced in the lower zones receive alternative

sentences more often than those in the higher sentencing zones.

The average age of federal

offenders sentenced to

prison is 35 years,

compared to 37 years for

prison/community split, 40

years for probation with

confinement, and 39 years

for probation.

Specifically, guideline

offense level and Criminal

History Category, alone or

in combination, are the

principal factors

determining whether an

offender receives an

alternative sentence.
Alternative Sentencing in the Federal Criminal Justice System

13

ALTERNATIVE

APPLIED

ALTERNATIVE

NOT APPLIED

ALTERNATIVE

APPLIED

ALTERNATIVE

NOT APPLIED

TOTAL n % n % TOTAL n % n %

5,378 3,677 68.4 1,701 31.6 5,378 3,677 68.4 1,701 31.6

SENTENCING ZONE GENDER

Zone A 2,673 2,070 77.4 603 22.6 Male 3,451 2,195 63.6 1,256 36.4

Zone B 1,624 1,068 65.8 556 34.2 Female 1,927 1,482 76.9 445 23.1

Zone C 1,081 539 49.9 542 50.1 RACE

CRIMINAL HISTORY CATEGORY White 2,537 1,801 71.0 736 29.0

I 3,970 3,071 77.4 899 22.6 Black 1,621 1,117 68.9 504 31.1

II 487 280 57.5 207 42.5 Hispanic 860 495 57.6 365 42.4

III 572 234 40.9 338 59.1 Other 353 258 73.1 95 26.9

IV 192 60 31.2 132 68.8 AGE

V 75 13 17.3 62 82.7 Under 21 280 190 67.9 90 32.1

VI 82 19 23.2 63 76.8 21-25 807 510 63.2 297 36.8

OFFENSE TYPE 26-30 828 543 65.6 285 34.4

Robbery 11 5 45.5 6 54.5 31-35 701 458 65.3 243 34.7

Drugs 734 479 65.3 255 34.7 36-40 694 469 67.6 225 32.4

Firearms 282 168 59.6 114 40.4 41-50 1,109 778 70.1 331 29.9

Larceny 707 531 75.1 176 24.9 Over 50 955 726 76.0 229 24.0

Fraud 1,634 1,175 71.9 459 28.1 EDUCATION

Other White Collar 747 537 71.9 210 28.1 No H.S. 1,417 832 58.7 585 41.3

Immigration 370 169 45.7 201 54.3 H.S. Grad. 1,932 1,354 70.1 578 29.9

Other 893 613 68.6 280 31.4 Some College 1,386 1,006 72.6 380 27.4

ACCEPTANCE OF RESPONSIBILITY College Grad. 567 441 77.8 126 22.2

Reduction 5,129 3,554 69.3 1,575 30.7

No Reduction 249 123 49.4 126 50.6

Table 9

Imposition of Alternative Sentences for Eligible Offenders

Fiscal Year 2007

Zone A offenders are sentenced to available alternatives most

often (77.4%); Zone B offenders are sentenced to available

alternatives less often (65.8%); and Zone C offenders are

sentenced to available alternatives least often (49.9%).

Stricter sentencing for Zone C offenders is related to their more

serious nature (relative to Zones A and B). This sentencing

pattern persists for different categories of offenders. The following

analysis examines this pattern for different types of offenders and

demonstrates the relationship between their receipt of alternative

sentences and sentencing zone (which is a proxy for offense

severity, or, alternatively, offender culpability).

Criminal History

Although Criminal History Category is a component of an

offender’s sentencing zone, it also plays a separate role in

determining whether offenders are sentenced to alternatives. Less

serious offenders, as measured by prior criminal record, more

frequently receive alternative sentences. Table 9 shows that the

majority (77.4%) of offenders in Criminal History Category I who

are eligible for alternative sentences receive them. This proportion

is substantially higher than for the other categories, which range

from 57.5 percent for Category II offenders to 17.3 percent for

Zone A offenders are

sentenced to available

alternatives most often

(77.4%); Zone B offenders

are sentenced to available

alternatives less often

(65.8%); and Zone C

offenders are sentenced to

available alternatives least

often (49.9%).
14

United States Sentencing Commission

Category V offenders. The tendency of sentencing courts to

impose alternatives sparingly for offenders with more extensive

criminal records is consistent with the guidelines’ statement at

USSG §5C1.1 Application Note 7 which states: “The use of

substitutes for imprisonment as provided in subsections (c) and (d)

is not recommended for most defendants with a criminal history

category of III or above. Generally, such defendants have failed to

reform despite the use of such alternatives.”

Table 1056 shows a consistent impact of sentencing zone in

conjunction with Criminal History Category. About 80 percent of

Category I offenders in Zones A (80.2%) and B (80.8%) are

sentenced to alternatives. However, that proportion drops to 62.8

percent, for Category I offenders in Zone C. Offenders in the

remaining five Criminal History Categories similarly are sentenced

to alternatives at higher rates in Zone A compared to Zones B and

C.

The placement within Criminal History Category and sentencing

zone of female offenders accounts for their higher rates of

alternative sentences when they qualify for alternatives. Table 9

shows that female offenders (76.9%) more often are sentenced to

alternatives than male offenders (63.6%). A larger proportion of

female offenders (80.8%) than male offenders (69.9%) are in

ZONE A ZONE B ZONE C

ALTERNATIVE

APPLIED

ALTERNATIVE

NOT APPLIED

ALTERNATIVE

APPLIED

ALTERNATIVE

NOT APPLIED

ALTERNATIVE

APPLIED

ALTERNATIVE

NOT APPLIED

TOTAL Total n % n % Total n % n % Total n % n %

TOTAL 5,378 2,673 2,070 77.4 603 22.6 1,624 1,068 65.8 556 34.2 1,081 539 49.9 542 50.1

CRIMINAL HISTORY CATEGORY

I 3,970 2,340 1,876 80.2 464 19.8 952 769 80.8 183 19.2 678 426 62.8 252 37.2

II 487 160 110 68.7 50 31.3 204 129 63.2 75 36.8 123 41 33.3 82 66.7

III 572 152 77 50.7 75 49.3 239 103 43.1 136 56.9 181 54 29.8 127 70.2

IV 192 10 5 50.0 5 50.0 109 38 34.9 71 65.1 73 17 23.3 56 76.7

V 75 11 2 18.2 9 81.8 44 10 22.7 34 77.3 20 1 5.0 19 95.0

VI 82 0 0 -0 - 76 19 25.0 57 75.0 6 0 - 6 100.0

OFFENSE TYPE

Robbery 11 5 2 -3 - 3 1- 2 - 3 2 - 1-

Drugs 734 342 247 72.2 95 27.8 160 96 60.0 64 40.0 232 136 58.6 96 41.4

Firearms 282 99 66 66.7 33 33.3 83 58 69.9 25 30.1 100 44 44.0 56 56.0

Larceny 707 451 377 83.6 74 16.4 199 123 61.8 76 38.2 57 31 54.4 26 45.6

Fraud 1,634 838 646 77.1 192 22.9 528 389 73.7 139 26.3 268 140 52.2 128 47.8

Other White

Collar 747 373 288 77.2 85 22.8 231 160 69.3 71 30.7 143 89 62.2 54 37.8

Immigration 370 81 54 66.7 27 33.3 151 78 51.7 73 48.3 138 37 26.8 101 73.2

Other 893 484 390 80.6 94 19.4 269 163 60.6 106 39.4 140 60 42.9 80 57.1

ACCEPTANCE OF RESPONSIBILITY

Reduction 5,129 2,558 2,007 78.5 551 21.5 1,549 1,032 66.6 517 33.4 1,022 515 50.4 507 49.6

No Reduction 249 115 63 54.8 52 45.2 75 36 48.0 39 52.0 59 24 40.7 35 59.3

Table 10

Sentencing Zones and Alternatives for Eligible Offenders

Fiscal Year 2007

About 80 percent of

Category I offenders in

Zones A (80.2%) and B

(80.8%) are sentenced to

alternatives.
Alternative Sentencing in the Federal Criminal Justice System

15

Criminal History Category I. See Table 12.57 In addition,

female offenders (56.8%) are sentenced in Zone A at a higher

rate than male offenders (45.7%), and male offenders (23.2%)

are sentenced in Zone C at a higher rate than female

offenders (14.5%). See Table 11.58

ZONE A ZONE B ZONE C

TOTAL n % n %n %

TOTAL 5,378 2,673 49.7 1,624 30.2 1,081 20.1

CRIMINAL HISTORY CATEGORY

I 3,970 2,340 58.9 952 24.0 678 17.1

II 487 160 32.9 204 41.9 123 25.3

III 572 152 26.6 239 41.8 181 31.6

IV 192 10 5.2 109 56.8 73 38.0

V 75 11 14.7 44 58.7 20 26.7

VI 82 0 0.0 76 92.7 6 7.3

ACCEPTANCE OF RESPONSIBILITY

Reduction 5,129 2,558 49.9 1,549 30.2 1,022 19.9

No Reduction 249 115 46.2 75 30.1 59 23.7

OFFENSE TYPE

Robbery 11 5 45.5 3 27.3 3 27.3

Drugs 734 342 46.6 160 21.8 232 31.6

Firearms 282 99 35.1 83 29.4 100 35.5

Larceny 707 451 63.8 199 28.1 57 8.1

Fraud 1,634 838 51.3 528 32.3 268 16.4

Other White Collar 747 373 49.9 231 30.9 143 19.1

Immigration 370 81 21.9 151 40.8 138 37.3

Other 893 484 54.2 269 30.1 140 15.7

GENDER

Male 3,451 1,579 45.7 1,070 31.0 802 23.2

Female 1,927 1,094 56.8 554 28.7 279 14.5

RACE

White 2,537 1,388 54.7 705 27.8 444 17.5

Black 1,621 825 50.9 533 32.9 263 16.2

Hispanic 860 259 30.1 273 31.7 328 38.1

Other 353 197 55.8 111 31.4 45 12.8

AGE

Under 21 280 141 50.4 62 22.1 77 27.5

21-25 807 396 49.1 233 28.9 178 22.1

26-30 828 399 48.2 275 33.2 154 18.6

31-35 701 332 47.4 218 31.1 151 21.5

36-40 694 344 49.5 208 30.0 142 20.5

41-50 1,109 555 50.1 343 30.9 211 19.0

Over 50 955 502 52.6 285 29.8 168 17.6

EDUCATION

No High School 1,417 562 39.7 471 33.2 384 27.1

H.S. Grad. 1,932 988 51.1 587 30.4 357 18.5

Some College 1,386 740 53.4 408 29.4 238 17.2

College Grad. 567 341 60.1 129 22.8 97 17.1

Table 11

Sentencing Zones for Offenders Eligible for Alternative Sentences

Fiscal Year 2007
16

United States Sentencing Commission

The importance of Criminal History Category also is demonstrated

in the differences between the imposition of alternative sentences

for White and Black offenders. There is virtually no difference

between the proportions of eligible White (76.8%) and Black

(77.9%) Zone A offenders sentenced to alternatives. See Table

13.59 There are differences, however, comparing alternative

sentences imposed for White and Black offenders sentenced in

Zones B and C. A larger proportion of White offenders in Zone B

(69.9%) and Zone C (54.5%) are sentenced to alternatives

compared to Black offenders in Zone B (64.5%) and Zone C

(49.4%). See Table 13.

The overwhelming majority of White (87.2%) and Black (85.9%)

offenders sentenced in Zone A, in which there is a similar rate of

alternative sentences, are in Criminal History Category I.

However, in Zones B and C, where rates of alternative sentences

CATEGORY I CATEGORY II CATEGORY III CATEGORY IV CATEGORY V CATEGORY VI

TOTAL n % n % n % n % n % n %

TOTAL 5,378 3,970 73.8 487 9.1 572 10.6 192 3.6 75 1.4 82 1.5

OFFENSE TYPE

Robbery 11 7 63.6 1 9.1 2 18.2 1 9.1 0 0.0 0 0.0

Drugs 734 553 75.3 59 8.0 81 11.0 21 2.9 11 1.5 9 1.2

Firearms 282 213 75.5 25 8.9 30 10.6 6 2.1 4 1.4 4 1.4

Larceny 707 527 74.5 57 8.1 67 9.5 25 3.5 14 2.0 17 2.4

Fraud 1,634 1,234 75.5 160 9.8 137 8.4 51 3.1 25 1.5 27 1.6

Other White Collar 747 566 75.8 62 8.3 78 10.4 30 4.0 7 0.9 4 0.5

Immigration 370 231 62.4 55 14.9 70 18.9 11 3.0 2 0.5 1 0.3

Other 893 639 71.6 68 7.6 107 12.0 47 5.3 12 1.3 20 2.2

GENDER

Male 3,451 2,413 69.9 329 9.5 424 12.3 153 4.4 63 1.8 69 2.0

Female 1,927 1,557 80.8 158 8.2 148 7.7 39 2.0 12 0.6 13 0.7

RACE

White 2,537 1,947 76.7 203 8.0 242 9.5 81 3.2 31 1.2 33 1.3

Black 1,621 1,095 67.6 177 10.9 207 12.8 66 4.1 39 2.4 37 2.3

Hispanic 860 631 73.4 81 9.4 101 11.7 33 3.8 5 0.6 9 1.1

Other 353 292 82.7 25 7.1 21 6.0 12 3.4 0 0.0 3 0.8

AGE

Under 21 280 221 78.9 21 7.5 30 10.7 8 2.9 0 0.0 0 0.0

21-25 807 585 72.5 80 9.9 105 13.0 24 3.0 7 0.9 6 0.7

26-30 828 539 65.1 97 11.7 118 14.3 35 4.2 21 2.5 18 2.2

31-35 701 482 68.8 67 9.6 75 10.7 38 5.4 19 2.7 20 2.8

36-40 694 490 70.6 77 11.1 72 10.4 27 3.9 10 1.4 18 2.6

41-50 1,109 832 75.0 85 7.7 119 10.7 44 4.0 13 1.2 16 1.4

Over 50 955 817 85.5 60 6.3 53 5.5 16 1.7 5 0.5 4 0.4

EDUCATION

No High School 1,417 877 61.9 163 11.5 238 16.8 83 5.9 27 1.9 29 2.1

H.S. Grad. 1,932 1,392 72.0 189 9.8 207 10.7 72 3.7 31 1.6 41 2.1

Some College 1,386 1,136 82.0 97 7.0 103 7.4 28 2.0 15 1.1 7 0.5

College Grad. 567 516 91.0 28 4.9 14 2.5 8 1.4 1 0.2 0 0.0

Table 12

Criminal History Categories for Offenders Eligible for Alternative Sentences

Fiscal Year 2007
17

Alternative Sentencing in the Federal Criminal Justice System

differ by race, larger proportions of White offenders are in Criminal

History Category I (61.4% in Zone B and 68.2% in Zone C),

compared to Black offenders, 46.3 percent in Zone B and 52.8

percent in Zone C.

Criminal History Category also is related to the varying rates of

alternative sentences for offenders with different levels of

education. Offenders with higher levels of education are more

likely than less educated offenders to be sentenced to alternatives.

Table 9 shows that more than three-quarters (77.8%) of offenders

with at least a college degree were sentenced to an alternative. In

contrast, less than two-thirds (58.7%) of offenders without a high

school diploma were sentenced to an alternative. These two

groups of offenders also differ substantially in their Criminal History

Categories. The overwhelming majority (91.0%) of college

graduates are in Criminal History I, compared to less than

two-thirds (61.9%) of high-school dropouts. See Table 12.

Criminal History Category has a lesser impact on the rates of

alternative sentences for offenders in different age groups.

Offenders older than 50 years are sentenced to alternatives

(76.0%) more often than offenders in the younger age groups.

Rates of alternative sentences for the younger age groups range

from 63.2 percent for offenders aged 21-25 years to 70.1 percent

for offenders aged 41-50 years. See Table 9. The overwhelming

ZONE A ZONE B ZONE C

ALTERNATIVE

APPLIED

ALTERNATIVE

NOT APPLIED

ALTERNATIVE

APPLIED

ALTERNATIVE

NOT APPLIED

ALTERNATIVE

APPLIED

ALTERNATIVE

NOT APPLIED

TOTAL Total n % n % Total n % n % Total n % n %

TOTAL 5,378 2,673 2,070 77.4 603 22.6 1,624 1,068 65.8 556 34.2 1,081 539 49.9 542 50.1

GENDER

Male 3,451 1,579 1,179 74.7 400 25.3 1,070 656 61.3 414 38.7 802 360 44.9 442 55.1

Female 1,927 1,094 891 81.4 203 18.6 554 412 74.4 142 25.6 279 179 64.2 100 35.8

RACE

White 2,537 1,388 1,066 76.8 322 23.2 705 493 69.9 212 30.1 444 242 54.5 202 45.5

Black 1,621 825 643 77.9 182 22.1 533 344 64.5 189 35.5 263 130 49.4 133 50.6

Hispanic 860 259 198 76.4 61 23.6 273 153 56.0 120 44.0 328 144 43.9 184 56.1

Other 353 197 159 80.7 38 19.3 111 77 69.4 34 30.6 45 22 48.9 23 51.1

AGE

Under 21 280 141 106 75.2 35 24.8 62 38 61.3 24 38.7 77 46 59.7 31 40.3

21-25 807 396 295 74.5 101 25.5 233 137 58.8 96 41.2 178 78 43.8 100 56.2

26-30 828 399 290 72.7 109 27.3 275 173 62.9 102 37.1 154 80 52.0 74 48.0

31-35 701 332 258 77.7 74 22.3 218 129 59.2 89 40.8 151 71 47.0 80 53.0

36-40 694 344 265 77.0 79 23.0 208 136 65.4 72 34.6 142 68 47.9 74 52.1

41-50 1,109 555 438 78.9 117 21.1 343 234 68.2 109 31.8 211 106 50.2 105 49.8

Over 50 955 502 415 82.7 87 17.3 285 221 77.5 64 22.5 168 90 53.6 78 46.4

EDUCATION

No High School 1,417 562 415 73.8 147 26.2 471 259 55.0 212 45.0 384 158 41.2 226 58.8

H.S. Grad. 1,932 988 775 78.4 213 21.6 587 393 67.0 194 33.0 357 186 52.1 171 47.9

Some College 1,386 740 575 77.7 165 22.3 408 296 72.5 112 27.5 238 135 56.7 103 43.3

College Grad. 567 341 273 80.1 68 19.9 129 108 83.7 21 16.3 97 60 61.9 37 38.1

Table 13

Sentencing Zones and Alternatives for Eligible Offenders

Fiscal Year 2007

Offenders with higher

levels of education are

more likely than less

educated offenders to be

sentenced to alternatives.
18

United States Sentencing Commission

majority of offenders older than 50 years (85.5%) is in Criminal

History Category I. Rates of younger offenders in Criminal History

Category I range from 65.1 percent for offenders age 26-30 years

to 78.9 percent for offenders under the age of 21 years. See Table

12. Sentencing zone is of less importance for rates of alternative

sentences for offenders of different ages. The rates of offenders

sentenced in Zone A are nearly equal for each offender age group;

approximately half of the offenders in each age group is sentenced

in this zone. However, offenders over 50 years do have the

smallest proportion of offenders sentenced in Zone C.

Offense Severity

Table 10 shows that, in general, the likelihood of an offender

receiving an alternative sentence decreases in the higher

sentencing zones regardless of offense type, as would be

expected with the confinement requirements for those zones.

However, firearms (59.6%) and immigration (45.7%) offenders are

less likely, overall, to receive alternative sentences. See Table 9.

The more serious conduct of firearms and immigration offenders,

as indicated by guideline factors, is associated with their lower

rates of alternative sentences.

Of the firearms offenders sentenced under USSG §2K2.1

(Unlawful Receipt, Possession, or Transportation of Firearms or

Ammunition; Prohibited Transactions Involving Firearms or

Ammunition),60 the majority (89.1%) have guideline base offense

levels of 12 or 14. These offenders’ guideline calculations,

therefore, originate in the two most serious Zones, C or D, of the

sentencing table. Despite the fact that the final offense levels for

firearms offenders ultimately leave them equally distributed among

Zones A (35.1%), B (29.4%), and C (35.5%) (Table 11), they are

sentenced to alternatives comparatively less often than other

offenders. The seriousness of firearms offenses in general, and as

measured by guideline base offense levels, are associated with

their lower rates of alternative sentences.61

Immigration offenders also are less likely to receive alternative

sentences compared to other offenders. Offense severity also is

relevant to sentences for immigration offenders (all of whom are

United States citizens). All of the offenders sentenced under the

immigration guideline (USSG §2L1.1, Smuggling, Transporting, or

Harboring an Unlawful Alien)62 and eligible for alternative

sentences have relatively serious (Zone C) guideline base offense

levels of 12. However, sentences for these offenders largely are

influenced by sentencing practices in a single district. The largest

proportion (48.4%) of immigration offenders sentenced under

USSG §2L1.1 is in the Southern District of Texas. Sentences for

immigration offenders in that district are particularly relevant

because (1) a larger proportion of immigration offenders in that

district (61.3%) are in Zone C compared to all other districts

(30.8%) and (2) a smaller proportion of immigration offenders in

that district (31.4%) are sentenced to alternatives compared to all

other districts (56.2%).

This sentencing pattern for immigration offenders also is reflected

in the rates of alternative sentences for Hispanic offenders.

Overall, White (71.0%) and Black (68.9%) offenders are sentenced

to alternatives at rates substantially higher than Hispanic offenders

Sentencing zone is of less

importance for rates of

alternative sentences for

offenders of different ages.

The rates of offenders

sentenced in Zone A are

nearly equal for each

offender age group;

approximately half of the

offenders in each age group

is sentenced in this zone.

However, offenders over

50 years do have the

smallest proportion of

offenders sentenced in

Zone C.

The more serious conduct

of firearms and immigration

offenders, as indicated by

guideline factors, is

associated with their lower

rates of alternative

sentences.
19

Alternative Sentencing in the Federal Criminal Justice System

(57.6%). See Table 9. Hispanic offenders account for more than

two-thirds (68.6%) of the immigration offenders described above.

The overrepresentation of Hispanic offenders among immigration

offenders accounts for their lower rates of alternative sentences

compared to White and Black offenders.

Offenders sentenced for offenses other than firearms and

immigration are more likely to receive alternative sentences.

Offenders sentenced for the financial crimes of larceny (75.1%),

fraud (71.9%), and other white collar offenses (71.9%) are most

often sentenced to alternatives (Table 9), and these offenders are

more likely to be sentenced in Zones A and B. See Table 11.

Offense severity also is relevant for sentences for these offenders.

Most of these financial offenders (83.5% of the larceny, fraud, and

other white collar offenses, combined) are sentenced under the

theft and fraud guideline (USSG §2B1.1) which has base offense

levels (six and seven) in Zone A. The majority (56.9%) of the

offenders sentenced under the theft and fraud guideline ultimately

are sentenced in Zone A. Aside from offense severity, financial

offenses may be more suited to alternative sentences because of

restitution. A substantial proportion of larceny (67.6%), fraud

(65.2%), and other white collar (58.9%) offenders were ordered to

pay restitution as part of their sentences. To the extent that these

offenders are sentenced to prison alternatives, they may be better

positioned to pay restitution.

Drug offenders eligible for alternative sentences also receive those

alternatives at a relatively high rate (65.3%). See Table 9. That

such a large proportion of drug offenders receive alternative

sentences is unexpected because so many (31.6%) (Table 11) are

sentenced in Zone C and offenders sentenced in Zone C are less

likely, overall, to receive alternative sentences compared to

offenders in Zones A and B.

Criminal History Category and drug type combine to reduce the

Zone C effect on alternative sentences for drug offenders. More

than half (54.6%) of the drug offenders are marijuana offenders.

Marijuana offenders account for an even larger proportion (64.7%)

of the drug offenders sentenced in Zone C. Nearly two-thirds

(65.3%) of marijuana offenders sentenced in Zone C are

sentenced to alternatives. Criminal History Category also is a

factor influencing alternative sentences for drug offenders. Nearly

all (92.0%) of the Zone C marijuana offenders are in Criminal

History Category I. The predominance of marijuana offenders with

little or no prior records contributes to the unusually high rate of

alternative sentences for Zone C drug offenders.

Another indicator of offender seriousness is the application of

Acceptance of Responsibility (USSG §3E1.1). This guideline

provision provides for a two- or three-level offense level decrease

for offenders who clearly accept responsibility for their offenses.63

Offenders who receive these offense level reductions are more

likely to receive alternative sentences. The overwhelming majority

(95.4%) of offenders eligible for alternative sentences receive

offense level decreases for acceptance and, among those, 69.3

percent are sentenced to available alternatives. Among the

minority of offenders (4.6%) who do not receive offense level

decreases for Acceptance of Responsibility, only half (49.4%) are

sentenced to available alternatives. See Table 9.

Drug offenders eligible for

alternative sentences

receive those alternatives at

a relatively high rate

(65.3%).

The overwhelming majority

(95.4%) of offenders

eligible for alternative

sentences receive offense

level decreases for

acceptance and, among

those, 69.3 percent are

sentenced to available

alternatives.
20

United States Sentencing Commission

Sentencing zone also is relevant in the relationship between

Acceptance of Responsibility and offenders receiving alternative

sentences. The overwhelming majority of offenders with offense

level decreases for Acceptance of Responsibility in Zones A

(78.5%) and B (66.6%) receive alternative sentences, compared to

one-half (50.4%) sentenced in Zone C. A similar pattern exists for

offenders without offense level decreases for Acceptance of

Responsibility, but the very small numbers of offenders in those

categories make the comparison less meaningful. See Table 10.

Conclusion

In the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, Congress stated, in part,

that “The Commission shall insure that the guidelines reflect the

general appropriateness of imposing a sentence other than

imprisonment in cases in which the defendant is a first offender

who has not been convicted of a crime of violence or otherwise

serious offense.”64 In turn, the Commission incorporated a mix of

sentence types into the guidelines so that courts have the

necessary flexibility to sentence appropriately all types of

offenders.

Federal sentencing courts have used these tools over the years,

primarily for fraud and white collar offenses, and, most importantly,

for United States citizens. The issues regarding non-citizen

offenders, while beyond the scope of this monograph, are of legal

and social interest and consequence to the federal criminal justice

community. With respect to United States citizens, it is impossible

to discern from available data the exact reasons sentencing courts

have in mind when deciding whether to impose alternative

sentences. This analysis, however, suggests some factors that

are relevant to those decisions, particularly for less serious

offenders and offenders with little or no prior criminal history.

Effective alternative sanctions are important options for federal,

state, and local criminal justice systems. For the appropriate

offenders, alternatives to incarceration can provide a substitute for

costly incarceration. Ideally, alternatives also provide those

offenders opportunities by diverting them from prison (or reducing

time spent in prison) and into programs providing the life skills and

treatment necessary to become law-abiding and productive

members of society.

Effective alternative

sanctions are important

options for federal, state,

and local criminal justice

systems. For the

appropriate offenders,

alternatives to incarceration

can provide a substitute for

costly incarceration.
21

Alternative Sentencing in the Federal Criminal Justice System

1. For the purposes of this paper, alternative sentences are defined as those involving probation and

community confinement as described in the federal sentencing guidelines at USSG §5C1.1.

2. The United States Sentencing Commission is an independent agency in the judicial branch of government.

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

policies and practices for the federal courts, including guidelines regarding the appropriate form and severity of

punishment for offenders convicted of federal crimes; (2) to advise and assist Congress, the federal judiciary,

and the executive branch in the development of effective and efficient crime policy; and (3) to collect, analyze,

research, and distribute a broad array of information on federal crime and sentencing issues. Data for the

analyses in this paper are from the United States Sentencing Commission's fiscal year datafiles.

3. Caputo, Gail A. 2004. Intermediate Sanctions in Corrections. University of North Texas Press.

4. Id.

5. Id.

6. Benda, Brent B. 2005. Introduction: Boot Camps Revisited: Issues, Problems, Prospects in Rehabilitation

Issues, Problems, and Prospects in Boot Camp. Ed. Brent B. Benda and Nathaniel J. Pallone. Hawthorne

Press.

7. The PEW Center on the States. 2008. One in 100: Behind Bars in America 2008.

8. Id.

9. Id.

10. Pub. L. No. 98–473.

11. See 28 U.S.C. § 994(j).

12. Probation terms are authorized for felony offenders for one to five years and for misdemeanor offenders for

no more than five years.

13. Pub. L. No. 100–690.

14. See 18 U.S.C. § 3563 and 18 U.S.C. § 3583.

15. See 18 U.S.C. § 3561 and USSG §5B1.1.

16. Class A felonies carry sentencing terms of life or death. Class B felonies carry sentences of 25 years or

more. See 18 U.S.C. § 3559.

17. See 28 U.S.C. § 994(i).

18. For example, mandatory conditions of probation prohibit probationers from committing a new crime and

unlawfully possessing and/or using controlled substances. See 18 U.S.C. § 3563. The law also requires that

offenders, as appropriate, attend domestic violence rehabilitation programs, provide DNA samples, submit to

drug testing, and/or adhere to fine payment schedules.

19. Discretionary conditions of probation at the court’s disposal include requiring the offender to provide family

support and/or restitution, maintain consistent employment, refrain from any substance use, and obtain

specified medical or psychiatric treatment. See 18 U.S.C. § 3563(b). Policy statements of both the United

States Sentencing Commission (at USSG §§5B1.3(c) and (d)) and the Judicial Conference of the United States

distinguish between standard and special discretionary conditions of probation.

20. See USSG §5B1.3(e).

21. The offense level is calculated using offense specific aggravating and mitigating factors prescribed by the

guidelines. The Criminal History Category is based on the recency and severity of an offender’s prior sentences

and supervision status. The sentencing range is determined by the intersection of the offense level and

Endnotes
22

U.S. Sentencing Commission

Criminal History Category on the sentencing table. For example, an offender at offense level nine and Criminal

History Category III faces a sentencing range of eight to 14 months. See USSG §1B1.1 for an overview of

guideline application, including offense level and Criminal History Category computations.

22. See USSG §5C1.1.

23. Although these options are conditions of probation, the guidelines allow them to be substituted for

incarceration in order to meet the conditions of 28 U.S.C. § 994(b)(2). In the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984,

Congress directed that the maximum of a sentencing range could not exceed the minimum by more than six

months or 25 percent of the minimum. The guidelines allow non-prison sentences for Zone B offenders,

creating sentencing ranges larger than six months because the minimum confinement term for a probation

sentence is zero months (the maximum terms in Zone B begin at seven months). The guidelines avoid

sentencing ranges greater than six months for Zone B offenders by requiring probation terms for these to

include intermediate confinement.

24. Non-guideline sentences are sentences imposed below the guideline range that only mention U.S. v.

Booker, 18 U.S.C. § 3553, or related factors as a reason for a below-range sentence, or do not provide

sufficient information to be classified as a departure. This category includes cases that cite departure reasons

that are not affirmatively and specifically identified in the provisions, policy statements, or commentary of the

federal Guidelines Manual and cases that do not provide any reason for the sentence below the guideline

range.

25. For example, a sentence range of eight to 14 months associated with a final offense level of 13 and

Criminal History Category of III is in Zone C of the sentencing table. If the court sentences the offender to the

minimum of eight months, it may impose a term of supervised release with conditions of community confinement

for up to four of the eight months.

26. Of the 72,865 cases sentenced in fiscal yesar 2007, 63,906 have complete sentencing guideline application

information and are included in the table.

27. This analysis is limited to information contained in the sentencing documents submitted to the Commission.

Courts are required to submit sentencing documentation for felonies and Class A misdemeanors. Sentences

for petty offenses are not included in the Commission’s datafile. In fiscal year 2007, the Administrative Office of

the United States Courts reported 67,759 convictions for petty offenses (See Judicial Business of the United

States Courts, 2007). Offenders convicted of petty offenses are more likely to be sentenced to alternatives to

prison compared to offenders convicted of felonies or Class A misdemeanors. In addition, drug possessing

offenders receiving special probation under 18 U.S.C. § 3607 do not have judgments of conviction and are not

included in the Commission’s datafile.

28. Of the 72,865 cases sentenced in fiscal year 2007, 63,906 have complete sentencing guideline application

information. Of the 63,906 cases, 96 have been excluded that were not sentenced to prison or probation. An

additional 43 cases have been excluded due to missing information on type of sentence imposed.

Prison/Community Split includes all cases in which offenders received prison and conditions of confinement as

defined in USSG §5C1.1.

29. Of the 72,865 offenders sentenced in fiscal year 2007, 3,346 were excluded from this calculation due to

missing citizenship status. Of the 26,016 non-citizen offenders, 80.3 percent are in the United States illegally.

30. See 8 U.S.C. § 1227.

31. Deportable alien status is one of a number of public safety factors considered in the assessment of an

inmate’s overall custody classification. Federal Bureau of Prisons. Inmate Security Designation and Custody

Classification Program Statement. 2006. http://www.bop.gov/policy/progstat/5100_008.pdf.

32. A total of 817 non-United States citizens were sentenced to non-prison sentences in fiscal year 2007.

Slightly more than half (58.1%) of these offenders were sentenced to probation only. Primarily, these offenders

were convicted of immigration (28.0%) and fraud (28.3%) offenses.

33. Of the 72,865 cases sentenced in fiscal year 2007, 63,906 have complete sentencing guideline application

information. Of these, 153 have been excluded due to missing information on citizenship status.

Endnotes
23

Alternative Sentencing in the Federal Criminal Justice System

34. The proportions of offenders in Zone D who are United States citizens (66.9%) and non-citizens (33.1%)

reflect more closely the proportion of each group in the overall federal offender population.

35. Of the 72,865 cases sentenced in fiscal year 2007, 63,906 have complete sentencing guideline application

information. Of these, 22,923 are non-United States citizens. Of the 22,923 non-citizens, 12 have been

excluded that were not sentenced to prison or probation. An additional 13 cases have been excluded due to

missing information on type of sentence imposed. Prison/Community Split includes all cases in which offenders

received prison and conditions of confinement as defined in USSG §5C1.1.

36. Of the 72,865 cases sentenced in fiscal year 2007, 63,906 have complete sentencing guideline application

information. Of these, 40,830 are United States citizens. Of the 40,830 cases, 80 have been excluded that

were not sentenced to prison or probation. An additional 30 cases have been excluded due to missing

information on type of sentencing imposed. Prison/Community Split includes all cases in which offenders

received prison and conditions of confinement as defined in USSG §5C1.1.

37. Of the 697,451 cases sentenced from fiscal year 1997 through fiscal year 2007, 5,416 have been excluded

that were not sentenced to prison or probation. An additional 3,772 cases have been excluded due to missing

information on sentence imposed.

38. The increased rate of imprisonment is, in part, attributable to the higher proportion of immigration offenders,

who are not eligible for alternative sentences, in the federal caseload. For example, immigration offenses

accounted for 13.7% of the federal caseload in 1997 (1997 Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing Statistics) and

nearly doubled to 24.3% in 2007 (2007 Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing Statistics).

39. Of the 697,451 cases sentenced from fiscal year 1997 through fiscal year 2007, 103,454 have been

excluded due to incomplete sentencing guideline application information. Of the remaining 593,997 cases, six

have been excluded due to missing information on sentencing zone. An additional 2,828 cases have been

excluded due to missing information on citizenship status. An additional 1,163 cases have been excluded that

were not sentenced to terms of prison or probation, and 943 cases have been excluded due to missing

information on type of sentence imposed. Of the remaining cases, the 50,115 sentenced in Zone A are

represented.

40. Of the 697,451 cases sentenced from fiscal year 1997 through fiscal year 2007, 103,454 have been

excluded due to incomplete sentencing guideline application information. Of the remaining 593,997 cases, six

have been excluded due to missing information on sentencing zone. An additional 2,828 cases have been

excluded due to missing information on citizenship status. An additional 1,163 cases have been excluded that

were not sentenced to terms of prison or probation, and 943 cases have been excluded due to missing

information on type of sentence imposed. Of the remaining cases, the 45,679 sentenced in Zone B are

represented.

41. Of the 697,451 cases sentenced from fiscal year 1997 through fiscal year 2007, 103,454 have been

excluded due to incomplete sentencing guideline application information. Of the remaining 593,997 cases, six

have been excluded due to missing information on sentencing zone. An additional 2,828 cases have been

excluded due to missing information on citizenship status. An additional 1,163 cases have been excluded that

were not sentenced to terms of prison or probation, and 943 cases have been excluded due to missing

information on type of sentence imposed. Of the remaining cases, the 36,892 sentenced in Zone C are

represented.

42. Criminal aliens are subject to deportation and therefore are ineligible for community-based sentences.

See 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2).

43. Of the 43,503 cases sentenced in fiscal year 2007 involving United States citizens, 111 cases that were

not sentenced to prison or probation have been excluded. An additional 40 cases missing information on

sentence imposed have been excluded. The Drug category includes the following offense types: Trafficking,

Use of a Communication Facility, and Simple Possession. The Non-Fraud White-Collar category includes the

following offense types: Embezzlement, Forgery/Counterfeiting, Bribery, Money Laundering, and Tax. The

Other category includes a variety of offense types. See Appendix A of the 2007 Sourcebook of Federal

Sentencing Statistics. Of the 43,352 cases, 2,632 have been excluded due to missing sentencing guideline

application information.

Endnotes
24

U.S. Sentencing Commission

44. The Non-Fraud White Collar category includes the following offense types: Embezzlement,

Forgery/Counterfeiting, Bribery, Money Laundering, and Tax. See Appendix A in 2007 Sourcebook of Federal

Sentencing Statistics for definitions of offense type categories.

45. Of the 43,503 cases sentenced in fiscal year 2007 involving United States citizens, 111 cases that were not

sentenced to prison or probation have been excluded. An additional 40 cases missing information on sentence

imposed have been excluded. Cases missing information on length of sentence imposed have been excluded.

Calculations for average prison terms exclude 323 cases sentenced to life. The Combination of Alternatives

category includes cases with two or more alternative sentences imposed: home confinement, community

confinement, and/or intermittent confinement. Of the 42,352 cases, 124 have been excluded due to missing

information on monetary penalties. Monetary penalties include fine, cost of supervision, and/or restitution. Of

the 43,228 cases with monetary penalties imposed, 65 have been excluded due to missing information on

penalty amount. The median represents the midpoint, so that half of the cases have values below the median

and the remaining half have values above the median. Of the 43,352 cases, 414 have been excluded due to

missing information on sentence relative to the guideline range. The Above Range category includes both

departures and variances above the guideline range. The Government-Sponsored Below Range category

includes USSG §5K1.1 Substantial Assistance Departures, USSG §5K3.1 Early Disposition Program

Departures, and other government-sponsored downward departures. The Other Below Range category

includes both departures and variances below the guideline range.

46. See USSG §§5E1.1 and 5E1.2 for information on the imposition of restitution and fines.

47. The median represents the midpoint such that half of the monetary penalties are less than the median value

and the remaining half of monetary penalties are greater than the median value.

48. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

49. Congress, in 28 U.S.C. § 994(d), directs the Commission to “assure that the guidelines and policy

statements are entirely neutral as to the race, sex, national origin, creed, and socioeconomic status of

offenders.” The Commission considers certain offender characteristics such as age as “not ordinarily relevant in

determining whether a departure is warranted” but “[u]nless expressly stated, this does not mean that the

Commission views such circumstances as necessarily inappropriate to the determination of the sentence. . . .”

See USSG §5H.

50. Of the 43,503 cases sentenced in fiscal year 2007 involving United States citizens, 111 cases that were not

sentenced to prison or probation have been excluded. An additional 40 cases missing information on sentence

imposed have been excluded. Of the 43,352 cases, 98 have been excluded due to missing information on

offender race. Of the 43,352 cases, eight have been excluded due to missing information on offender gender.

Of the 43,352 cases, 41 have been excluded due to missing information on offender age.

51. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c) for instances requiring the sentencing court to provide reasons for a sentence.

52. United States Attorney’s offices in the federal judicial districts decline to prosecute cases for a number of

reasons. To the extent that (presumably) less serious offenses are not prosecuted, the proportion of offenders

eligible for alternative sentences in a district may be lowered. Finally, the data cannot account for the court’s

considerations of such crucial issues as availability of appropriate alternative resources in a district, or other

information that may be known to the court at the time of sentencing.

53. For this analysis, Zone A probation sentences are considered alternatives and any confinement sentence

for Zone A offenders is considered in excess of available alternatives. Zone B sentences of probation with

confinement conditions and split sentences that include imprisonment are considered alternatives; sentences of

only prison are considered in excess of the available alternatives. Zone C sentences that include any length of

community confinement substituted for imprisonment are considered alternatives; sentences of only prison are

considered in excess of the available alternatives.

54. A number of factors were included in this analysis. However, only those factors that demonstrated some

association with alternative sentences are reviewed here.

55. Of the 72,865 cases sentenced in fiscal year 2007, 5,378 are included in this table with complete

sentencing guideline application information. Only United States citizens are included. Offenders with complete

information on type of sentence imposed, sentenced in Zones A, B, or C in the Sentencing Table, and

Endnotes
25

Alternative Sentencing in the Federal Criminal Justice System

sentenced within the sentencing guideline range are included. Offenders subject to mandatory minimum

sentences have been excluded. Of the 603 Zone A offenders not sentenced to alternatives, 109 were

sentenced to time served. Of the 556 Zone B offenders not sentenced to alternatives, 104 were sentenced to

time served. Of the 542 Zone C offenders not sentenced to alternatives, 37 were sentenced to time served.

Definitions of offense type categories are in Appendix A of the 2007 Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing

Statistics.

56. Of the 72,865 cases sentenced in fiscal year 2007, 5,378 are included in this table with complete

sentencing guideline application information. Only United States citizens are included. Offenders with complete

information on type of sentence imposed, sentenced in Zones A, B, or C in the Sentencing Table, and

sentenced within the sentencing guideline range are included. Offenders subject to mandatory minimum

penalties have been excluded. Definitions of offense type categories are in Appendix A of the 2007 Sourcebook

of Federal Sentencing Statistics.

57. Id.

58. Id.

59. Id.

60. Of the 282 firearms offenders sentenced in fiscal year 2007, 248 (87.9%) were sentenced under USSG

§2K2.1 and included in this part of the analysis.

61. The firearms category contains a relatively small number of offenders. Because of the small numbers of

cases in each category, caution should be used in making generalizations or conclusions about these offenders.

62. Of the 370 immigration offenders sentenced in fiscal year 2007, 283 (76.5%) were sentenced under USSG

§2L1.1 and included in this part of the analysis.

63. See USSG §3E1.1 for requirements for the two- and three-level decreases.

64. See 28 U.S.C. § 994(j).

Endnotes