[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 184 (Friday, September 22, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49316-49317]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-23552]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION
Sentencing Guidelines for United States Courts
AGENCY: United States Sentencing Commission.
ACTION: Notice of priority areas for Commission research and amendment
study. Request for public comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: As part of its statutory continuing responsibility to analyze
sentencing issues, including the operation of the federal sentencing
guidelines, the Commission has identified certain priorities as the
principal focus of its work in the coming year and, in some cases,
beyond. Following the practice of past years, the Commission invites
comment on identified priorities (including the scope and manner of
study, particular problem areas and possible solutions, and any other
matters relevant to an identified priority). The Commission also
invites comment on any other aspect of guideline application that it
should address during the coming year.
DATES: Public comment should be received not later than October 31,
1995, to be considered by the Commission in shaping its work during the
next year.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to: United States Sentencing Commission, One
Columbus Circle, N.E., Suite 2-500 South, Washington, D.C. 20002-8002,
Attention: Public Information--Priorities Comment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Courlander, Public Information
Specialist, Telephone: (202) 273-4590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Sentencing Commission, an
independent agency in the judicial branch of the United States
Government, is empowered by 28 U.S.C. Sec. 994(a) to promulgate
sentencing guidelines and policy statements for federal sentencing
courts. The statute further directs the Commission to periodically
review and revise guidelines previously promulgated and authorizes it
to submit guideline amendments to the Congress no later than the first
day of May each year. See 28 U.S.C. Sec. 994(o), (p).
As in previous years, the Commission uses this announcement to
solicit formal and informal comment regarding certain areas upon which
the Commission expects to concentrate its attention during the coming
year. This notice provides interested persons with an opportunity to
inform the Commission of legal, operational, or policy concerns within
the identified areas relating to the guidelines and to suggest specific
solutions and alternative approaches.
Following are the priority areas for amendment study, research, or
other planned actions identified by the Commission. Where possible, a
general timeframe for the initiative is indicated. These timeframes
should be considered subject to change as the Commission deems
necessary.
Measuring the Success of the Guidelines: A staff working
group, under the direction of an outside consultant, has undertaken a
number of projects that will measure the success of the guidelines in
meeting the goals set forth in the Sentencing Reform Act. Projects
related to just punishment, recidivism, and selective incapacitation
are well underway. Other projects will examine offense seriousness,
real-offense sentencing, judicial discretion, criminal history,
alternatives to incarceration, and disparity.
Guideline Simplification and Modification: A staff working
group, under the direction of an outside consultant, will focus on
simplifying and improving the guidelines. This effort will be informed
substantially by the work, discussed above, measuring the success of
the guidelines. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. Sec. 994 (o), (p), and
(x), the Commission intends that this process will involve consultation
with a wide variety of interested groups and individuals. The
Commission has prepared the following purpose statement for this
working group:
Working Group on Guideline Simplification: Purpose Statement
I. Introduction
The Sentencing Commission, at its May meeting, identified
comprehensive review of the federal guidelines system as a top agency
priority. The Commission is well positioned to undertake this task,
given the vast amounts of information available from the more than
225,000 cases sentenced under the guidelines during the past eight
years, numerous appellate opinions issued on various guidelines issues,
the growing body of academic literature and public comment, and the
extensive empirical analysis of the guidelines conducted to date.
This purpose statement outlines the working group's proposed scope
of inquiry and methodology.
II. Working Group Mandate
The objective of the working group's comprehensive review of the
guidelines is twofold: 1) to reduce the complexity of guideline
application (``simplification''); and 2) to improve federal sentencing
by working closely with the judiciary and others to refine the
guidelines (revisiting the balance of judicial flexibility/discretion
and the availability of alternative punishments). The group will
comprehensively and aggressively assess each major section of the
guidelines, critique application complexities, and develop options for
Commission consideration. Complexity is viewed as the source of
confusion and frustration in guideline application. Moreover, this
confusion results in unreliable application and judicial resistance--
two outcomes that undermine the effectiveness of the guidelines.
Guideline complexity derives, in part, from fundamental decisions
made by the original Commission in its effort to meet the Sentencing
Reform Act's twin goals of: 1) assuring that the purposes of sentencing
are met (i.e., just punishment, deterrence, incapacitation, and
rehabilitation); and 2) providing certainty and fairness in meeting the
purposes of sentencing while avoiding unwarranted disparities between
similarly situated defendants (see 28 U.S.C. Sec. 991(b)(1)). To ensure
that the ramifications of all options for change are clear, the group
will highlight the broader policy implications of its proposals (e.g.,
its effect on proportionality or a judge's ability to individualize
sentences).
III. Methodology
The working group proposes the following strategy to assist
commissioners in their deliberations on how they might simplify and
improve the guidelines system. The group will prepare concise issue
papers on major guideline topics to provide a foundation for Commission
consideration of relevant issues and possible sentencing models. Each
paper will:
Review the history behind the original policy decision so
as to ensure that the Commission is sensitive to the underlying
principles and the impact of any revisions on these principles;
Assess how the particular guideline is working (e.g.,
application complexities; frequency of use identified through
monitoring data);
Summarize information needs that might reasonably assist
the
[[Page 49317]]
Commission's decision making on the topic; and
Outline broad options for refinement.
These papers will provide sound bases for commissioners, staff, and
the public to understand the current guidelines and assess any
proposals for change.
The group is currently drafting issue papers on the following
topics:
1. Sentencing Reform Act (and subsequent sentencing legislation)
2. Drafting process used by initial Commission; major changes since
that time
3. Real offense sentencing (Relevant Conduct)
4. Criminal history
5. Level of detail (specific offense characteristics)
6. Chapter Three adjustments
7. Departures/offender characteristics
8. Sentencing table/sentencing ranges
9. Availability of probation/split sentences (alternatives)
10. Multiple counts
This methodology will enable staff to provide the Commission the
full range of options for reviewing and revising the guidelines. In its
review, the working group will examine how state guideline systems have
addressed issues that judges and practitioners have found particularly
complex in the federal system. In addition, the group will consult
closely with judges and practitioners and solicit a wide variety of
public comment from the Criminal Law Committee of the Judicial
Conference, Practitioners' and Probation Officers' Advisory Groups,
Department of Justice, Federal and Community Defenders, and others.
Finally, the working group will analyze all responsible suggestions for
guideline reform from outside individuals and groups.
The simplification process should be developmental and done with
caution because significant changes may result in unforeseen anomalies.
Therefore, it is important that as the simplification working group
develops proposals it ensures that the proposals: 1) be consistent with
the Sentencing Reform Act; 2) be sensitive to case law; and 3) be aware
of the underlying premises that the previous Commission used in
developing the guidelines. This caution will ensure that the guidelines
are an evolving set of standards that change as information and
experience buttresses the need for change.
Evaluation of Commission Staff Resources: The Commission
has begun a program to measure the use of staff resources as presently
allocated and to explore changes to the current staff resource
allocation. This review is examining present procedures and processes
to improve efficiency and determine strengths and weaknesses in various
Commission functional components.
Organizational Guidelines for Environmental Offenses:
Development of fine guidelines for organizational defendants convicted
of environmental offenses remains under consideration; however, the
Commission expects that the guideline assessment and simplification
efforts set forth above will receive priority attention.
Substantial Assistance Working Group: This ongoing working
group has recently completed the data collection portion of its study
effort. The group is expecting to issue a report this fall.
Implementation of Crime-related Legislation: The Congress
is now considering legislation concerning terrorism, firearms, and
other crime-related issues. The Commission will move promptly to
implement any enacted legislation affecting criminal penalties through
the promulgation of necessary guideline amendments or other actions as
appropriate.
Miscellaneous Issues: The Commission expects to propose
for comment amendments to the food and drug guidelines. Amendments
addressing some of the more important guideline application issues
involving conflicting court interpretations also may be considered.
The Commission welcomes comments on the aforementioned priorities
as well as any other aspect of guideline application or implementation
of the Sentencing Reform Act.
Authority: 28 U.S.C. Sec. 994 (a), (o), (p).
Richard P. Conaboy,
Chairman.
[FR Doc. 95-23552 Filed 9-21-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 2210-40-P
