Sentences with phrase «from federal sentencing guidelines»

Any federal judge who chooses to deviate from the Federal Sentencing Guidelines must be able to explain that choice.

Defended a mechanical contracting company and its president in a federal bribery investigation arising from an award of United States Post Office construction contracts and obtained a downward departure from federal sentencing guidelines sentence of incarceration to a sentence of probation.

Punishments for this type of fraud generally stem from the federal sentencing guidelines.

Defended an individual after plea - convicted of money - laundering conspiracy for misuse of U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Utility Service funds, and obtained a downward departure from federal sentencing guidelines of more than 20 levels, from a substantial sentence of incarceration to a sentence of probation

Not exact matches

This conclusion is supported by comments from the Office of Inspector General (OIG), a consistent reading the the Federal Sentencing Guidelines (FSG), the position taken by the government in Corporate Integrity Agreement fraud and abuse settlements, and by the general ethical standards that apply to the general counsel.

reasons why the Supreme Court's Sixth Amendment jurisprudence has been so quirky and unpredictable has the the fact that the Court has been, from the very beginning and even in all state cases, shadow - boxing about the validity, viability, virtues and vices of the federal sentencing guidelines.

However, thanks to this terrific University of Michigan Law Library site, which has all of Alito's academic writings here, we can unearth what might be hints as to how a Justice Alito might view key participants in the post-Booker world from two commentaries appearing in the Federal Sentencing Reporter not long after the guidelines were enacted.

They know state and federal sentencing guidelines, and they know the punishments you may face if you are convicted — consequences like a jail or prison term, the loss of your driver's license, substantial fines, a criminal record, damage to your reputation and future job prospects, and separation from your loved ones, to name just a few.

'' On Crack Sentencing: 100 Times Zero Is Still Zero from Drug Law Blog Prof. Berman at the Sentencing Law and Policy Blog continues to argue that the recent tweak to the federal sentencing guidelines around crack is, in his words, soooo siSentencing: 100 Times Zero Is Still Zero from Drug Law Blog Prof. Berman at the Sentencing Law and Policy Blog continues to argue that the recent tweak to the federal sentencing guidelines around crack is, in his words, soooo siSentencing Law and Policy Blog continues to argue that the recent tweak to the federal sentencing guidelines around crack is, in his words, soooo sisentencing guidelines around crack is, in his words, soooo significant.

Following a day - long hearing, the federal judge departed from guidelines providing for a sentence in excess of 20 years to impose a 14 - month sentence.

Retained at sentencing phase and obtained a 20 - level downward departure under federal sentencing guidelines (from a substantial sentence of incarceration to a 60 - day sentence at a halfway house and probation) for an individual who pled guilty to federal money - laundering conspiracy for misuse of U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Utility Service funds.

In addition, Grassley's bill ignores the reality that strong federal sentencing guidelines have another valuable byproduct — squeezing cooperation from reticent criminals so they will testify against other criminals, while incentivizing them to plead guilty to lesser offenses to get shorter prison terms...

Without clarification from the Court regarding both appellate «reasonableness» review and the specific meaning of the Court's declaration that the Guidelines are now advisory, federal sentencing will become increasingly chaotic, and we will indeed see the strange «Wonderland» of sentencing Justice Scalia predicted in his dissent in Booker two years ago.

Attached is a Summary by David Debold from Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP Entitled: «Two Supreme Court Decisions in December 2007 Highlight the Advisory Nature of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines».

Sentencing has finally moved from the hands of the prosecutors and the harshness of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines back to the discretion of the district court judges.

A significant note from the Duke Law Journal by Joanna Huang with the above title has been posted today September 29 on the Sentencing Law and Policy blog According to Ms. Huang, ``... in 1987 the United States political and social systems lost trust in the judiciary and severely limited its authority by enacting the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.»