White Collar Sentencing in Federal Court

White Collar Sentencing in Federal Court Crackdown noted by Tampa Federal Criminal Defense Attorney, W.F. ''Casey'' Ebsary, Jr. - The Eleventh Circuit Court declared a sentence illegal when a white collar defendant was not sent to prison. The trial court has repeatedly placed the defendant on the federal equivalent of probation. The United States Attorney has repeatedly appealed the below guidelines sentence, and the appeals court has repeatedly reversed.

The court concluded "it is difficult to imagine a would-be white-collar criminal being deterred from stealing millions of dollars from his company by the threat of a purely probationary sentence, regardless of how much probation that person received."

The complete decision is available here:

Opinion of the Appeals Court

White Collar Financial Fraud Defense? Tell Me Your Story Toll Free 1-877-793-9290 .

Note: This office did not represent any parties in this case.

Source: http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200814712.pdf

White Collar Sentencing in Federal Court

Sentencing Crack Guidelines - Federal Cases - United States Sentencing Commission

The Supreme Court issued decisions in three important cases: Kimbrough, Gall and Watson. In Kimbrough, the court held that a sentencing court had the authority to reject the 100 to 1 crack ratio in determining a reasonable sentence under the Booker analysis. The case gives great deference to the findings of the United States Sentencing Commission regarding the crack/powder disparity. The Sentencing Commission has recently suggested that a 20 to 1 ratio would be appropriate. As a result, it is important that, if you have any crack sentencing cases coming up in the near future, you may want to continue the sentencing so that you can you can address the crack/powder ratio issue in light of the Court's holding in Kimbrough.

Additionally, a reminder that the Sentencing Commission will be meeting today to discuss the retroactivity of the new crack amendment.