Opinion ID: 157329
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Permissible Departure Factors

Text: 8 In response to the perception that sentencing courts meted out unjustifiably disparate sentences to similarly situated offenders, Congress passed the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 and created the United States Sentencing Commission (the Commission). See id. at 92, 116 S.Ct. 2035. The Commission was charged with developing a comprehensive set of sentencing guidelines. Id. The Commission formulated a set of guidelines commonly known as the United States Sentencing Guidelines (the Sentencing Guidelines). 2 See id. The sentencing court must now impose on a defendant a sentence falling within the range of the applicable Guideline if the case is an ordinary one. Id. 9 Although a court no longer has unfettered discretion when sentencing an offender, it may depart from the applicable Sentencing Guideline range in certain circumstances. See id. Sentencing courts are authorized to depart in cases that feature aggravating or mitigating circumstances of a kind or degree not adequately taken into consideration by the Commission. Id. at 94, 116 S.Ct. 2035. Thus, the sentencing court can depart from the Sentencing Guidelines if it finds the presence of a factor that makes the case atypical. Id. Some factors, however, can never be used as a basis for a departure. 3 See id. at 93, 116 S.Ct. 2035. 10 Unless specifically prohibited by the Sentencing Guidelines, any factor may be considered as a potential basis for departure. See id. at 109, 116 S.Ct. 2035. [A] federal court's examination of whether a factor can ever be an appropriate basis for departure is limited to determining whether the Commission has proscribed, as a categorical matter, consideration of the factor. If the answer to the question is no--as it will be most of the time--the sentencing court must determine whether the factor, as occurring in the particular circumstances, takes the case outside the heartland of the applicable Guideline. Id. Because remorse is not one of the factors specifically forbidden by the Sentencing Guidelines, it may be a permissible departure factor in certain circumstances. See United States v. Jaroszenko, 92 F.3d 486, 490-91 (7th Cir.1996) (holding that a sentencing court has the discretion to consider remorse as a factor supporting a downward departure). 11