The federal Sentencing Guidelines greatly influence the sentences imposed for federal crimes. Once binding on federal courts, the Guidelines are now the starting point for federal sentencing in most cases. They provide the principal standard against which the reasonableness of any sentence imposed is judged. In the last quarter of FY2014, over 75% of the sentences imposed by federal courts fell within the sentence ranges recommended by the Guidelines or within those ranges but reduced by prosecution endorsed departures recommended in the Guidelines. The Guidelines are the work of the U.S. Sentencing Commission. Congress created the commission and authorized the Guidelines in the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984. The first Guidelines were promulgated with an effective date of November 1, 1987. The commission may promulgate amendments which become effective 180 days after they are presented to Congress, absent congressional action. Sentencing under the Guidelines is essentially a score-keeping exercise, not unlike the procedure for filling out a federal income tax return. The process involves assigning "offense levels" for a particular offense based on the nature of the offense and the circumstances under which it was committed. Under the Guidelines, most sentencing determinations follow from the final offense level identified at the end of the process. The sentencing ranges for any term of imprisonment depend both on the final offense level and upon the offender's criminal history score calculated on the basis of his past criminal record and divided into categories. Each of the possible forty-three offense levels has six sentencing ranges corresponding to the six criminal history categories In noncapital cases, federal sentencing begins after a conviction at trial or more often pursuant to a plea agreement. Unless excused by the court, a probation officer will conduct a presentence investigation in anticipation of providing the court with a presentence report. The investigation includes an interview with the defendant. The report will include a detailed recitation of factual information and of the Guideline and statutory provisions which the officer believes relevant and applicable. The parties are supplied with copies of the report, afforded an opportunity to comment, and may be allowed to present evidence to the court relating to objections to the report. A party who objects to a recommendation in the report bears the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence. The court must begin its sentencing determinations with a calculation of the sentencing range called for under the Guidelines. Before imposing sentence the court must give the parties and victims of the crime a chance to be heard. Having identified the applicable Guideline range, the court, in the exercise of its sentencing discretion, considers it along with the other sentencing factors found in 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) and with any other applicable statutory demands, such as the requirement to impose a minimum sentence of imprisonment in some instances. In imposing sentence, the court will include a detailed explanation of its determinations and may impose probation, a fine, a special assessment, a term of incarceration, a term of supervised release, an obligation to pay restitution, and/or order forfeiture. The court may adjust an earlier sentence to correct clear error or to reflect substantial assistance to the government. The parties may challenge on appeal the sentence or determinations upon which it is based. The court's sentence will be upheld on appeal, if it is found procedurally and substantively reasonable. Base Offense Levels : A Guideline calculation is required for every serious offense for which the defendant is convicted. In most instances, the Guideline Index notes the Guideline offense section that corresponds to the offense of conviction. In other instances, the most closely analogous section applies. A few offense sections list a single offense level. Most, however, list two or more alternative base offense levels; indicate circumstances under which offense levels are to be added or subtracted; cross reference to the application of another offense section under some circumstances; or do some combination of the three. The offense section for drug trafficking, for instance, lists 5 alternative base offense levels, grounded primarily on the type and amount of the controlled substance involved. Four of those set minimum offense levels when the offense also involves a serious injury; the fifth refers to the Drug Quantity Table which contains an array of 17 escalating offense levels based on the amount and type of drug involved. In order to account for the cases which involve more than one type of controlled substance, the Guideline contains a drug equivalence table under which marijuana is used as the standard and other drugs are assigned an equivalent weight. For instance, 1 gram of heroin is treated as the equivalent of 1 kilogram of marijuana. It also lists 14 circumstances under which offense levels must be added to or subtracted from the base offense level (e.g., a two-level increase for possession of a firearm during the course of the offense). Adjustments : The Guidelines make adjustments for victim-related factors, the extent of the offender's participation (role in the offense), obstruction, conviction for multiple offenses, and the offender's acceptance of responsibility. The Guidelines make adjustments in five victim-related situations: (1) when the victim is vulnerable or the offense is hate crime motivated; (2) when the victim is or was a government official or member of the officer's immediate family; (3) when the victim is restrained; (4) when the offense is a federal crime of terrorism; and (5) when the offense is a serious human rights offense. The Guidelines devote five sections to matters related to the offender's role in the crime of conviction: (1) aggravating roles, (2) mitigating roles, (3) abuse of a position of trust or use of special skill, (4) use of a minor, and (5) use of body armor in a drug trafficking offense or a crime of violence. The Guidelines may adjust an offender's offense level based on his level of participation in the offense of conviction. There is no adjustment for the one-man crime or the defendant of average culpability in a crime with more than one offender. On the other hand, leaders or organizers of a large criminal endeavor, and their managerial subordinates warrant offense level increases. Conversely, minimal participants in an offense merit. An enhancement awaits a defendant who "abuse[s] a position of public or private trust, or use[s] a special skill, in a manner than significantly facilitate[s] the commission or concealment of the offense." A similar enhancement accompanies using, directing, commanding, encouraging, intimidating, counseling, training, procuring, recruiting, or soliciting a child under the age of 18 to commit a federal offense or to avoid apprehension; or attempting to do so. A defendant convicted of a crime of violence or a drug trafficking crime faces an enhancement, if body armor was involved in the offense. Obstruction may result in a sentencing enhancement under any of four sections: (1) obstruction or impeding the administration of justice, (2) reckless endangerment during flight, (3) commission of an offense while on release and (4) false registration of a domain name. The Guidelines use a procedure called grouping to account for a defendant's simultaneous convictions for several crimes within a single offense level. The crimes of conviction are divided into groups of related offenses (similar crimes/same harm/same victim/common scheme) and the offense level for each group is calculated using the most serious offense in the group as if it were the only offense of conviction. The offenses levels for each group are then assigned a number of units, the total converted into offense levels, and combined. Defendants are entitled to credit when they accept responsibility for their misconduct. Criminal History : A defendant's criminal record may be of consequence under the Guidelines for two reasons. First, each of the final offense levels is divided into six criminal history categories with its own sentencing range corresponding to the extent of the defendant's criminal record. Second, a defendant's criminal history will trigger repeat offender enhancements in some instances. Repeat Offenders : A defendant's final offense level and in some instances his criminal history category may also be modified to reflect his past criminal record. The Guidelines do so in the case of career offenders, professional offenders, armed career offenders, and child molesting recidivists. As a general matter, the Guidelines permit departure on any grounds that a court finds the Guidelines have not taken into account or have not taken into account to the extent appropriate. When a pattern of departures suggests that a factor has not been adequately addressed, the commission has generally taken up the matter in order to avoid unwarranted sentencing disparity and for compliance with the principles articulated in 18 U.S.C. 3553(a). The Guidelines acknowledge that a trial court in an individual case may consider the Guidelines sentence either too severe or insufficiently punitive. They speak to the concern in four ways. First, throughout the Guidelines, they note instances where either an upward or downward departure may be appropriate. Second, they discuss when criminal history-related departures may be appropriate. Third, they identify specific offender characteristics that permit or do not permit departure from the norm. Fourth, they identify offense characteristics that permit or do not permit such a departure. Most of the departures suggested in individual Guidelines indicate when an upward departure may be warranted. Many refer, expressly or implicitly, to one or more of the departures found in Part 5K of the Guidelines. Some are general; some are very specific. A few mention instances under which either an upward or a downward departure may be fitting. The Guidelines sometimes permit a sentencing court to depart from the defendant's otherwise applicable criminal history category, when the circumstances indicate the assignment either underestimates or overestimates the seriousness of the defendant's criminal record. The factors that mark a case in which an upward departure may be fitting include foreign, tribal, or other sentences not counted for criminal history purposes; sentences imposed for different crimes on different occasions; civil or administrative disposition of similar misconduct; pending criminal trial or sentencing on other charges; and similar criminal conduct without a criminal conviction (arrests may not be counted). When an upward departure is appropriate but the defendant is already in Category VI, the court may seek out the offense level where the sentencing range for Category VI is most appropriate.