Advisory, yet central
The federal Sentencing Guidelines produce a recommended range based on an offense level and a criminal history category. Judges must calculate that range correctly and consider it, but they can sentence outside it after weighing broader statutory factors. In fraud cases, the guideline for economic offenses is driven heavily by loss amount, with adjustments for certain aggravating or mitigating circumstances. Because small changes in loss or enhancements can move the range significantly, the guidelines calculation is often the most contested part of sentencing.
Where the arguments usually are
Disputes commonly focus on how loss should be measured, including the difference between actual and intended loss, which courts and the Sentencing Commission have revisited in recent years. Other arguments involve whether an enhancement applies, such as one tied to the way the scheme was carried out or to the defendant's position of trust, and whether a reduction for acceptance of responsibility is warranted. Plea agreements may include stipulations about some guideline issues, but in most cases the court is not bound by them. Reviewing the government's math with financial records and, where needed, a forensic accountant can make a meaningful difference.
State court works differently
New York state courts do not use a federal-style guidelines calculation. Sentencing there runs on ranges set by statute for the class of the offense, along with judicial discretion and plea negotiations. If your case could be brought in either forum, that difference is part of the early strategy. In a consultation, we review the likely guidelines range in a federal case, identify the issues worth contesting, and discuss how mitigation, restitution, and the facts of your life can be presented alongside the numbers.
