Often, NLPA is contacted by attorneys who represent federal criminal defendants who are in need of sentencing assistance, given the wide array of arguments that can be made in favor of sentences below what is called for by the United States Sentencing Guidelines.
The case of United States v. Freddie Wilson, Jr., case number 4:11-cr-02161-TLW-14 demonstrates how NLPA can assist counsel in the preparation of multi-faceted sentencing research that challenges the Sentencing Guidelines recommended, as well as presents mitigating arguments for a lesser sentence.
Facing such a long sentence, and needing assistance in the preparation of research challenging the harsh Guideline sentence, Mr. Wilson contacted NLPA to conduct research upon possible means to avoid an unduly harsh sentence.
NLPA conducted research on the potential sentence faced by Mr. Wilson, as well as the possibility of avoiding the harsh sentence put forth in the PSR, in conjunction with Mr. Wilson’s attorney, Joseph N. Connell, who was appointed to represent Mr. Wilson.
These factors include: the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant; the need to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense; the need for deterrence; the need to protect the public; the need to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training or medical care; the kinds of sentences available; the Sentencing Guidelines range; pertinent policy statements of the Sentencing Commission; the need to avoid unwanted sentencing disparities; and the need to provide restitution to victims.
Based upon a combination of all of the above factors, the district court for the District of South Carolina issued a below Guidelines sentence to Mr. Wilson. As a result, Mr. Wilson received a sentence of 41 months incarceration. Such represented a sentence almost two years below the minimum recommended Sentencing Guidelines.
The bottom line is that just because an individual faces overwhelming Sentencing Guidelines does not mean that all attempts at securing a lesser sentence must be abandoned in deference to the Probation Office or the federal prosecutor.
From challenging the procedural mechanisms of imposing a Guideline sentence to arguing the lack of factual support for sentencing enhancements to presenting mitigating arguments, NLPA has been at the forefront of attacking insidious and unfair sentences.
To learn more about obtaining a federal sentence reduction or additional services provided by NLPA, contact us today.