Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.
-
Upload
shannon-norton -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
2
Transcript of Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.
![Page 1: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines
Preliminary FY2009
![Page 2: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
1.0%1.5%2.0%2.3%2.4%3.7%3.7%
4.8%
6.4%
8.4%
11.1%
20.8%
30.7%
0.7% 0.5%
DrugI/II Larceny Fraud Traffic Assault DrugOther Burg-Dwell Robbery Burg-Other Weapon SexAslt Misc Murder Rape Kidnap
Preliminary FY2009Guideline Worksheets Keyed as of 9/9/09
(n=16,476)
![Page 3: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
General Compliance
Preliminary FY2009
![Page 4: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Preliminary FY2009 Judicial Agreement
with Guideline Recommendations
Overall Compliance Rate
Compliance80.0%
Mitigation10.0% Aggravation
10.0%
General Compliance:
The degree to which judges agree with the overall guidelines recommendation.
Direction of Departures
Mitigation50.0%
Aggravation50.0%
![Page 5: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Preliminary FY2009 Judicial Agreement
with Type of Recommended DispositionDispositional Compliance:
The degree to which judges agree with the type of sanction recommended.
RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION
Probation/No Incarceration
Incarceration 6 months or less
Incarceration over 6 months
Probation / No Incarceration 70.1% 25.0% 4.9%
Incarceration 6 months or less 11.3% 78.3% 10.4%
Incarceration over 6 months 5.6% 7.8% 86.6%
ACTUAL DISPOSITION
![Page 6: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Preliminary FY2009 Judicial Agreement with Sentence Length
Durational Compliance
Compliance80.4%
Mitigation10.1%
Aggravation9.5%
Durational Compliance:
The degree to which judges agree with the sentence length in cases in which defendants are recommended for jail/prison and receive at least one day incarceration.
Direction of Departures
Aggravation48.4%
Mitigation51.6%
![Page 7: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Departure Reasons
Preliminary FY2009
![Page 8: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Preliminary FY2009Most Frequently Cited Departure Reasons
Mitigation (10%)
• Plea agreement• Cooperated with authorities• Facts of case • Recommendation of CA• Sentenced to alternative• Minimal prior record• Offender health
Aggravation (10%)
• Plea agreement• Severity/type of prior record• Flagrancy of offense/facts of
case• Poor rehabilitation potential• Recommendation of jury• Current offense involved
drugs/alcohol• Degree of victim injury
![Page 9: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Compliance by Circuit
Preliminary FY2009
![Page 10: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
4606.16.787.231Prince William Area
23211.610.378.030Lee Area
41216.05.678.429Buchanan Area
3504.64.690.928Bristol Area
6403.15.291.727Radford Area
8426.710.982.426Harrisonburg Area
5988.212.479.425Staunton Area
6209.815.075.224Lynchburg Area
6886.713.180.223Roanoke Area
44018.66.874.522Danville Area
2416.214.179.721Martinsville Area
3457.57.085.520Loudoun Area
81111.29.978.919Fairfax
2307.410.981.718Alexandria
29317.15.577.517Arlington Area
38713.29.677.316Charlottesville Area
112716.68.375.215Fredericksburg Area
7186.711.382.014Henrico
9736.514.079.513Richmond City
60013.510.376.212Chesterfield Area
17312.110.477.511Petersburg Area
4086.911.381.910South Boston Area
38719.46.574.29Williamsburg Area
3417.310.382.48Hampton
4726.88.584.77Newport News
29412.614.373.16Sussex Area
40813.28.877.95Suffolk Area
9629.814.975.44Norfolk
50613.48.378.33Portsmouth
9186.69.484.02Virginia Beach
59612.17.780.21Chesapeake
Number of CasesAggravationMitigationComplianceCircuit NumberCircuit Name
4606.16.787.231Prince William Area
23211.610.378.030Lee Area
41216.05.678.429Buchanan Area
3504.64.690.928Bristol Area
6403.15.291.727Radford Area
8426.710.982.426Harrisonburg Area
5988.212.479.425Staunton Area
6209.815.075.224Lynchburg Area
6886.713.180.223Roanoke Area
44018.66.874.522Danville Area
2416.214.179.721Martinsville Area
3457.57.085.520Loudoun Area
81111.29.978.919Fairfax
2307.410.981.718Alexandria
29317.15.577.517Arlington Area
38713.29.677.316Charlottesville Area
112716.68.375.215Fredericksburg Area
7186.711.382.014Henrico
9736.514.079.513Richmond City
60013.510.376.212Chesterfield Area
17312.110.477.511Petersburg Area
4086.911.381.910South Boston Area
38719.46.574.29Williamsburg Area
3417.310.382.48Hampton
4726.88.584.77Newport News
29412.614.373.16Sussex Area
40813.28.877.95Suffolk Area
9629.814.975.44Norfolk
50613.48.378.33Portsmouth
9186.69.484.02Virginia Beach
59612.17.780.21Chesapeake
Number of CasesAggravationMitigationComplianceCircuit NumberCircuit Name
Preliminary FY2009
Most cases received:
-Circuit 15 (Fredericksburg)
-Circuit 13 (Richmond)
-Circuit 4 (Norfolk)
Highest compliance:
-Circuit 27 (Radford) 91.7%
-Circuit 28 (Bristol) 90.9%
Lowest compliance:
-Circuit 6 (Sussex) 73.1%
Highest aggravation:
-Circuit 9 (Williamsburg) 19.4%
Highest mitigation:
-Circuit 24 (Lynchburg) 15%
![Page 11: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
4606.16.787.231Prince William Area
23211.610.378.030Lee Area
41216.05.678.429Buchanan Area
3504.64.690.928Bristol Area
6403.15.291.727Radford Area
8426.710.982.426Harrisonburg Area
5988.212.479.425Staunton Area
6209.815.075.224Lynchburg Area
6886.713.180.223Roanoke Area
44018.66.874.522Danville Area
2416.214.179.721Martinsville Area
3457.57.085.520Loudoun Area
81111.29.978.919Fairfax
2307.410.981.718Alexandria
29317.15.577.517Arlington Area
38713.29.677.316Charlottesville Area
112716.68.375.215Fredericksburg Area
7186.711.382.014Henrico
9736.514.079.513Richmond City
60013.510.376.212Chesterfield Area
17312.110.477.511Petersburg Area
4086.911.381.910South Boston Area
38719.46.574.29Williamsburg Area
3417.310.382.48Hampton
4726.88.584.77Newport News
29412.614.373.16Sussex Area
40813.28.877.95Suffolk Area
9629.814.975.44Norfolk
50613.48.378.33Portsmouth
9186.69.484.02Virginia Beach
59612.17.780.21Chesapeake
Number of CasesAggravationMitigationComplianceCircuit NumberCircuit Name
4606.16.787.231Prince William Area
23211.610.378.030Lee Area
41216.05.678.429Buchanan Area
3504.64.690.928Bristol Area
6403.15.291.727Radford Area
8426.710.982.426Harrisonburg Area
5988.212.479.425Staunton Area
6209.815.075.224Lynchburg Area
6886.713.180.223Roanoke Area
44018.66.874.522Danville Area
2416.214.179.721Martinsville Area
3457.57.085.520Loudoun Area
81111.29.978.919Fairfax
2307.410.981.718Alexandria
29317.15.577.517Arlington Area
38713.29.677.316Charlottesville Area
112716.68.375.215Fredericksburg Area
7186.711.382.014Henrico
9736.514.079.513Richmond City
60013.510.376.212Chesterfield Area
17312.110.477.511Petersburg Area
4086.911.381.910South Boston Area
38719.46.574.29Williamsburg Area
3417.310.382.48Hampton
4726.88.584.77Newport News
29412.614.373.16Sussex Area
40813.28.877.95Suffolk Area
9629.814.975.44Norfolk
50613.48.378.33Portsmouth
9186.69.484.02Virginia Beach
59612.17.780.21Chesapeake
Number of CasesAggravationMitigationComplianceCircuit NumberCircuit Name
Preliminary FY2009
Most cases received:
-Circuit 15 (Fredericksburg)
-Circuit 13 (Richmond)
-Circuit 4 (Norfolk)
Highest compliance:
-Circuit 27 (Radford) 91.7%
-Circuit 28 (Bristol) 90.9%
Lowest compliance:
-Circuit 6 (Sussex) 73.1%
Highest aggravation:
-Circuit 9 (Williamsburg) 19.4%
Highest mitigation:
-Circuit 24 (Lynchburg) 15%
![Page 12: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Compliance by Type of Offense
Preliminary FY2009
![Page 13: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Preliminary FY2009Compliance by Type of Offense
85.5 85.0 83.6 82.2 80.5 79.776.5 73.3 72.3 69.9 68.5 66.7 65.5
61.7 61.5
8.93.7 8.0 8.7
7.7 10.512.4
13.9 13.6 16.914.6
14.4
25.227.2
14.8
5.511.3 9.1 11.9 9.8 12.8 14.0 13.3
16.9 18.9
9.2 11.2
23.7
8.4 11.1
Fraud DrugOth Larceny DrugI/II Traffic BurgOth Weapon Assault Misc Kidnap BurgDwel SexAssau Rape Robbery Murder
Compliance Mitigation Aggravation
1,822 785 3,340 5,041 1,392 399 379 1,053 242 83 609 333 119 618 169
![Page 14: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
FY2009 Changes and Additions to Guidelines
Recommendation 1:Drug Crimes Accompanied by Weapons Offense Requiring
Mandatory Minimum
![Page 15: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Recommendation 1
• Add a factor to Section C of the sentencing guidelines for Schedule I/II and other drugs to increase the prison sentence recommendation for offenders who have an accompanying weapons offense requiring a mandatory minimum term.
Additional 13 months on the midpoint for each 2-year mandatory minimum
Additional 32 months on the midpoint for each 5-year mandatory minimum
![Page 16: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Recommendation 1Compliance for Drug Crimes Accompanied by
Weapons Offense Requiring Mandatory Minimum
FY03-06(n=653)
Compliance69%
Mitigation10%
Aggravation21%
FY09 Preliminary(n=87)*
Compliance79%
Mitigation8%
Aggravation13%
*Excludes 23 cases missing Section C worksheet.
![Page 17: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
FY2009 Changes and Additions to Guidelines
Recommendation 2:False Statement on Firearm
Consent Form
![Page 18: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Recommendation 2
• Revise the weapons guidelines to increase the likelihood that some offenders convicted of making a false statement on a criminal history consent form required for purchasing a firearm will be recommended for probation or up to six months of incarceration rather than incarceration for a term of more than six months.
• Changed the score for the primary offense on Section A of the Weapon/Firearm worksheet
![Page 19: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Recommendation 2Compliance for Making a False Statement on a Consent Form
Required for Purchase of a Firearm
FY2007(n=66)
Compliance67%
Mitigation30%
Aggravation3%
FY2009 Preliminary(n=51)
Compliance82%
Mitigation14%
Aggravation4%
![Page 20: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
FY2009 Changes and Additions to Guidelines
Recommendation 3:Child Abuse/Neglect Offenses
![Page 21: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
![Page 22: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Recommendation 3 Compliance for New Guidelines Offenses:
Gross, wanton, or reckless care for a child (§18.2-371.1(B))& Cruelty and injuries to children (§40.1-103)
FY09 Preliminary(n=67)
Compliance79%
Mitigation9%
Aggravation12%
![Page 23: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
![Page 24: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
![Page 25: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Recommendation 3 Adjust points assigned to current child abuse/neglect
resulting in serious injury (§18.2-371.1(A))
FY09 Preliminary(n=21)
Compliance48%
Mitigation14%
Aggravation38%
Majority of departures cite degree of victim
injury
![Page 26: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Other Issues
Child Pornography & Solicitation of a Minor
![Page 27: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
FY2008 & Preliminary FY2009Child Pornography & Solicitation of a Minor
(n=184)
Compliance59%
Mitigation16%
Aggravation25%
![Page 28: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
FY2008 & Preliminary FY2009Child Pornography & Solicitation of a Minor
(n=184)
Type of Offense Compliance Mitigation Aggravation Total Cases
Produce/make child porn, etc. 50.0% 25.0% 25.0% 24
Reproduce/sell child porn, etc. 64.7% 23.5% 11.8% 17
Possess child porn, 1st or 2nd 56.8% 31.8% 11.4% 44
Solicit minor using communication system 60.2% 6.1% 33.7% 99
![Page 29: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
FY2008 & Preliminary FY2009Child Pornography & Solicitation of a Minor
(n=184)
Type of Offense Compliance Mitigation Aggravation Total Cases
Produce/make child porn, etc. 50.0% 25.0% 25.0% 24
Reproduce/sell child porn, etc. 64.7% 23.5% 11.8% 17
Possess child porn, 1st or 2nd 56.8% 31.8% 11.4% 44
Solicit minor using communication system 60.2% 6.1% 33.7% 99
![Page 30: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
FY2008 & Preliminary FY2009Possession of Child Pornography, 1st or 2nd offense
(n=44)
• Most offenders sentenced for possession of child porn– Multiple counts of primary offense
– No additional offenses
– No victim injury
– No significant prior record
• Most frequently cited mitigating departure reasons– Facts of the case
– Guidelines recommendation too high
– Plea agreement
– No serious prior record
![Page 31: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
FY2008 & Preliminary FY2009Possession of Child Pornography, 1st or 2nd offense
(n=44)
Dispositional Compliance
Compliance68%
Mitigation16%
Aggravation16%
Durational Compliance
Compliance56%
Mitigation37%
Aggravation7%
Median 15 months below guidelines recommendation
![Page 32: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
FY2008 & Preliminary FY2009Possession of Child Pornography, 1st or 2nd offense
(n=44)
Compliance by Number of Primary Offense Counts
1 count 2+ counts
Aggravation11.1
Aggravation11.5
Mitigation27.8 Mitigation
38.5
Compliance61.1 Compliance
50.0
+10.7%
![Page 33: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
FY2008 & Preliminary FY2009Child Pornography & Solicitation of a Minor
(n=184)
Type of Offense Compliance Mitigation Aggravation Total Cases
Produce/make child porn, etc. 50.0% 25.0% 25.0% 24
Reproduce/sell child porn, etc. 64.7% 23.5% 11.8% 17
Possess child porn, 1st or 2nd 56.8% 31.8% 11.4% 44
Solicit minor using communication system 60.2% 6.1% 33.7% 99
![Page 34: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
FY2008 & Preliminary FY2009Solicitation of Minor Using Communication System
(n=99)
• Most offenders sentenced for solicitation of minor– Only 1 count of solicitation
– No victim injury
– No significant prior record
• Most frequently cited aggravating departure reasons– Plea agreement
– Flagrancy of the offense
– Poor rehabilitation potential
![Page 35: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
FY2008 & Preliminary FY2009Solicitation of Minor Using Communication System
(n=99)
RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION
Probation/No Incarceration
Incarceration 6 months or less
Incarceration over 6 months
Probation / No Incarceration 32.6% 46.5% 20.9%
Incarceration 6 months or less 4.5% 50.0% 45.5%
Incarceration over 6 months 6.3% 3.1% 90.6%
ACTUAL DISPOSITION
![Page 36: Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022051620/56649f285503460f94c3ff39/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
FY2008 & Preliminary FY2009Solicitation of Minor Using Communication System
Effective Sentence (Months)
Number of Cases
1.0 1
3.0 7
4.0 2
6.0 6
12.0 8
18.0 1
24.0 4
36.0 2
38.0 1
Total 32
•16 cases received incarceration <= 6 months
•3 of the 16 have an additional offense
Section B Aggravating Cases
•16 cases received incarceration > 6 months
•11 of the 16 have additional offense
•Additional offense is usually an indecent liberties or attempted indecent liberties