Federal Drug Offenses: Departures from Sentencing Guidelines and Mandatory Minimum Sentences, Fiscal Years 1999-2001

The Judicial Conference issued a revised SOR (the AO 245B/C (Rev. 06/05)), and the Commission voted to approve the revised SOR at a public meeting on May 15, 2006. The Commission and the CLC issued a joint memorandum to all federal courts and probation offices informing them of the revised SOR and the mandate to use the revised SOR. The Commission assisted the AO in the development of an explanatory brochure that accompanied the revised SOR when it was issued. Also, the Commission participated with the CLC and the AO in a training session on the revised SOR that was televised on FJTN, the judiciary's television network that is available to all court personnel. As a result of this, Federal sentencing courts have shown a high rate of compliance with this new statutory requirement as courts submitted to the Commission the revised SOR in almost 90 percent of individual cases sentenced in fiscal year 2007. It is the Commission's belief that this high rate of usage of the revised SOR has been an important step toward achieving uniformity and accuracy in sentencing documentation, which in turn has enhanced standardized collection of data by the Commission. (Data collection) As a result, the incidence of unclear or difficult to interpret sentencing documentation in drug and other cases has significantly decreased as a result of a number of factors: (1) the issuance of the mandatory revised SOR, (2) the high rate of compliance with use of the revised SOR, (3) expanded training on sentencing documentation by the Commission and others, (4) enhanced quality control mechanisms instituted by the Commission in recent years for drug cases and for cases sentenced below the applicable guideline range, and (5) the Commission's development of an electronic system for the courts' submission of sentencing documentation, which is now used by 93 of the 94 judicial districts. (Training) The Commission developed and continues to use a training program on sentencing documentation, particularly the revised SOR, for probation officers, law clerks, and judges. These training efforts have been well received by the sentencing courts, and the Commission is in the process of expanding them to include other court personnel, such as courtroom deputies. In addition, at chief judge orientation programs conducted by the AO and at other programs for chief judges conducted by the Federal Judiciary Center, the Commission regularly instructs the chief judges of the district courts regarding their statutory responsibility under 28 U.S.C. 994(w) to ensure that, within 30 days following entry of judgment, the sentencing court submits to the Commission a written report of the sentence which shall include the judgment and commitment order, the revised SOR, any plea agreement, the indictment or other charging document, and the pre-sentence report. (Collaboration) As noted above, the implementation of this recommendation culminated in the June 2005 revision of the standard SOR by the Commission and the Committee on Criminal Law of the Judicial Conference of the United States (the "CLC"). Furthermore, the Commission, the CLC, and the AO continue to collaborate regularly regarding whether further revisions to the SOR might be appropriate.

The Judicial Conference issued a revised SOR (the AO 245B/C (Rev. 06/05)), and the Commission voted to approve the revised SOR at a public meeting on May 15, 2006. The Commission and the CLC issued a joint memorandum to all federal courts and probation offices informing them of the revised SOR and the mandate to use the revised SOR. The Commission assisted the AO in the development of an explanatory brochure that accompanied the revised SOR when it was issued. Also, the Commission participated with the CLC and the AO in a training session on the revised SOR that was televised on FJTN, the judiciary's television network that is available to all court personnel. As a result of this, Federal sentencing courts have shown a high rate of compliance with this new statutory requirement as courts submitted to the Commission the revised SOR in almost 90 percent of individual cases sentenced in fiscal year 2007. It is the Commission's belief that this high rate of usage of the revised SOR has been an important step toward achieving uniformity and accuracy in sentencing documentation, which in turn has enhanced standardized collection of data by the Commission. (Data collection) As a result, the incidence of unclear or difficult to interpret sentencing documentation in drug and other cases has significantly decreased as a result of a number of factors: (1) the issuance of the mandatory revised SOR, (2) the high rate of compliance with use of the revised SOR, (3) expanded training on sentencing documentation by the Commission and others, (4) enhanced quality control mechanisms instituted by the Commission in recent years for drug cases and for cases sentenced below the applicable guideline range, and (5) the Commission's development of an electronic system for the courts' submission of sentencing documentation, which is now used by 93 of the 94 judicial districts. (Training) The Commission developed and continues to use a training program on sentencing documentation, particularly the revised SOR, for probation officers, law clerks, and judges. These training efforts have been well received by the sentencing courts, and the Commission is in the process of expanding them to include other court personnel, such as courtroom deputies. In addition, at chief judge orientation programs conducted by the AO and at other programs for chief judges conducted by the Federal Judiciary Center, the Commission regularly instructs the chief judges of the district courts regarding their statutory responsibility under 28 U.S.C. 994(w) to ensure that, within 30 days following entry of judgment, the sentencing court submits to the Commission a written report of the sentence which shall include the judgment and commitment order, the revised SOR, any plea agreement, the indictment or other charging document, and the pre-sentence report. (Collaboration) As noted above, the implementation of this recommendation culminated in the June 2005 revision of the standard SOR by the Commission and the Committee on Criminal Law of the Judicial Conference of the United States (the "CLC"). Furthermore, the Commission, the CLC, and the AO continue to collaborate regularly regarding whether further revisions to the SOR might be appropriate.

The Judicial Conference issued a revised SOR (the AO 245B/C (Rev. 06/05)), and the Commission voted to approve the revised SOR at a public meeting on May 15, 2006. The Commission and the CLC issued a joint memorandum to all federal courts and probation offices informing them of the revised SOR and the mandate to use the revised SOR. The Commission assisted the AO in the development of an explanatory brochure that accompanied the revised SOR when it was issued. Also, the Commission participated with the CLC and the AO in a training session on the revised SOR that was televised on FJTN, the judiciary's television network that is available to all court personnel. As a result of this, Federal sentencing courts have shown a high rate of compliance with this new statutory requirement as courts submitted to the Commission the revised SOR in almost 90 percent of individual cases sentenced in fiscal year 2007. It is the Commission's belief that this high rate of usage of the revised SOR has been an important step toward achieving uniformity and accuracy in sentencing documentation, which in turn has enhanced standardized collection of data by the Commission. (Data collection) As a result, the incidence of unclear or difficult to interpret sentencing documentation in drug and other cases has significantly decreased as a result of a number of factors: (1) the issuance of the mandatory revised SOR, (2) the high rate of compliance with use of the revised SOR, (3) expanded training on sentencing documentation by the Commission and others, (4) enhanced quality control mechanisms instituted by the Commission in recent years for drug cases and for cases sentenced below the applicable guideline range, and (5) the Commission's development of an electronic system for the courts' submission of sentencing documentation, which is now used by 93 of the 94 judicial districts. (Training) The Commission developed and continues to use a training program on sentencing documentation, particularly the revised SOR, for probation officers, law clerks, and judges. These training efforts have been well received by the sentencing courts, and the Commission is in the process of expanding them to include other court personnel, such as courtroom deputies. In addition, at chief judge orientation programs conducted by the AO and at other programs for chief judges conducted by the Federal Judiciary Center, the Commission regularly instructs the chief judges of the district courts regarding their statutory responsibility under 28 U.S.C. 994(w) to ensure that, within 30 days following entry of judgment, the sentencing court submits to the Commission a written report of the sentence which shall include the judgment and commitment order, the revised SOR, any plea agreement, the indictment or other charging document, and the pre-sentence report. (Collaboration) As noted above, the implementation of this recommendation culminated in the June 2005 revision of the standard SOR by the Commission and the Committee on Criminal Law of the Judicial Conference of the United States (the "CLC"). Furthermore, the Commission, the CLC, and the AO continue to collaborate regularly regarding whether further revisions to the SOR might be appropriate.

The Judicial Conference issued a revised SOR (the AO 245B/C (Rev. 06/05)), and the Commission voted to approve the revised SOR at a public meeting on May 15, 2006. The Commission and the CLC issued a joint memorandum to all federal courts and probation offices informing them of the revised SOR and the mandate to use the revised SOR. The Commission assisted the AO in the development of an explanatory brochure that accompanied the revised SOR when it was issued. Also, the Commission participated with the CLC and the AO in a training session on the revised SOR that was televised on FJTN, the judiciary's television network that is available to all court personnel. As a result of this, Federal sentencing courts have shown a high rate of compliance with this new statutory requirement as courts submitted to the Commission the revised SOR in almost 90 percent of individual cases sentenced in fiscal year 2007. It is the Commission's belief that this high rate of usage of the revised SOR has been an important step toward achieving uniformity and accuracy in sentencing documentation, which in turn has enhanced standardized collection of data by the Commission. (Data collection) As a result, the incidence of unclear or difficult to interpret sentencing documentation in drug and other cases has significantly decreased as a result of a number of factors: (1) the issuance of the mandatory revised SOR, (2) the high rate of compliance with use of the revised SOR, (3) expanded training on sentencing documentation by the Commission and others, (4) enhanced quality control mechanisms instituted by the Commission in recent years for drug cases and for cases sentenced below the applicable guideline range, and (5) the Commission's development of an electronic system for the courts' submission of sentencing documentation, which is now used by 93 of the 94 judicial districts. (Training) The Commission developed and continues to use a training program on sentencing documentation, particularly the revised SOR, for probation officers, law clerks, and judges. These training efforts have been well received by the sentencing courts, and the Commission is in the process of expanding them to include other court personnel, such as courtroom deputies. In addition, at chief judge orientation programs conducted by the AO and at other programs for chief judges conducted by the Federal Judiciary Center, the Commission regularly instructs the chief judges of the district courts regarding their statutory responsibility under 28 U.S.C. 994(w) to ensure that, within 30 days following entry of judgment, the sentencing court submits to the Commission a written report of the sentence which shall include the judgment and commitment order, the revised SOR, any plea agreement, the indictment or other charging document, and the pre-sentence report. (Collaboration) As noted above, the implementation of this recommendation culminated in the June 2005 revision of the standard SOR by the Commission and the Committee on Criminal Law of the Judicial Conference of the United States (the "CLC"). Furthermore, the Commission, the CLC, and the AO continue to collaborate regularly regarding whether further revisions to the SOR might be appropriate.

The Judicial Conference issued a revised SOR (the AO 245B/C (Rev. 06/05)), and the Commission voted to approve the revised SOR at a public meeting on May 15, 2006. The Commission and the CLC issued a joint memorandum to all federal courts and probation offices informing them of the revised SOR and the mandate to use the revised SOR. The Commission assisted the AO in the development of an explanatory brochure that accompanied the revised SOR when it was issued. Also, the Commission participated with the CLC and the AO in a training session on the revised SOR that was televised on FJTN, the judiciary's television network that is available to all court personnel. As a result of this, Federal sentencing courts have shown a high rate of compliance with this new statutory requirement as courts submitted to the Commission the revised SOR in almost 90 percent of individual cases sentenced in fiscal year 2007. It is the Commission's belief that this high rate of usage of the revised SOR has been an important step toward achieving uniformity and accuracy in sentencing documentation, which in turn has enhanced standardized collection of data by the Commission. (Data collection) As a result, the incidence of unclear or difficult to interpret sentencing documentation in drug and other cases has significantly decreased as a result of a number of factors: (1) the issuance of the mandatory revised SOR, (2) the high rate of compliance with use of the revised SOR, (3) expanded training on sentencing documentation by the Commission and others, (4) enhanced quality control mechanisms instituted by the Commission in recent years for drug cases and for cases sentenced below the applicable guideline range, and (5) the Commission's development of an electronic system for the courts' submission of sentencing documentation, which is now used by 93 of the 94 judicial districts. (Training) The Commission developed and continues to use a training program on sentencing documentation, particularly the revised SOR, for probation officers, law clerks, and judges. These training efforts have been well received by the sentencing courts, and the Commission is in the process of expanding them to include other court personnel, such as courtroom deputies. In addition, at chief judge orientation programs conducted by the AO and at other programs for chief judges conducted by the Federal Judiciary Center, the Commission regularly instructs the chief judges of the district courts regarding their statutory responsibility under 28 U.S.C. 994(w) to ensure that, within 30 days following entry of judgment, the sentencing court submits to the Commission a written report of the sentence which shall include the judgment and commitment order, the revised SOR, any plea agreement, the indictment or other charging document, and the pre-sentence report. (Collaboration) As noted above, the implementation of this recommendation culminated in the June 2005 revision of the standard SOR by the Commission and the Committee on Criminal Law of the Judicial Conference of the United States (the "CLC"). Furthermore, the Commission, the CLC, and the AO continue to collaborate regularly regarding whether further revisions to the SOR might be appropriate.