Sentencing Guidelines for United States Courts

[[Page 34465]]

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

consideration. Request for public comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary: As part of its continuing statutory responsibility to analyze

sentencing issues, including the operation of the federal sentencing

guidelines, the Commission preliminarily 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 August 30,

1996, 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, NE, Suite 2-500, Washington, DC 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. 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. 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 anticipated priority areas for amendment study,

research, or other planned actions identified by the Commission. In

some cases, a general time frame for the initiative is indicated. These

time frames are subject to change as the Commission deems necessary.

The Commission welcomes comments on these priorities as well as any

other aspect of guideline application or implementation of the

Sentencing Reform Act.

Authority: 28 U.S.C. 994(a), (o), (p).

Richard P. Conaboy,

Chairman.

I. Implementation of New Laws Affecting Criminal Penalties

The Commission will continue to give priority to developing

guideline amendments that implement legislation enacted by Congress. In

this regard, Congress has recently enacted, or is expected to pass in

this Session, a number of bills that may necessitate changes in the

sentencing guidelines. Some of the more significant legislative

initiatives are:

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996,

Pub. L. 104-132 (April 24, 1996). This Act contains several directives

to amend the guidelines in specific ways, including a provision

(section 730) granting the Commission emergency authority to amend the

enhancement in USSG Sec. 3A1.4 (International Terrorism) so that it

applies broadly to any ``Federal Crime of terrorism'' as defined in 18

U.S.C. 2332b(g). The Act also contains numerous other provisions (e.g.,

increases in statutory maximum penalties, new offenses) that the

Commission must analyze in order to ascertain whether guideline

amendments are needed and, if so, what changes are appropriate.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996, 104-104 (February 8,

1996). This Act contains several provisions on obscene, harassing, or

wrongful use of telecommunications facilities that may necessitate

guideline amendments. The Commission recently promulgated an amendment

to USSG Sec. 2G1.2 to implement a new offense created by section 508 of

the Act (involving the solicitation of a minor to engage in prohibited

sexual conduct). See 61 FR 20308-09 (May 6, 1996).

The Sex Crimes Against Children Prevention Act of 1995, 104-71

(December 23, 1995). The Commission recently promulgated amendments to

USSG Secs. 2G2.1, 2G2.2, and 2G1.1 to implement directives of that Act.

See 61 FR 20306-09, supra. The Commission is now considering additional

conforming amendments to the child pornography guidelines in Chapter

Two, Part G and possible amendments to the sexual abuse guidelines in

Chapter Two, Part A, Subpart 3.

Immigration Bill, Other Legislation. Congress is finalizing an

Immigration Bill and is considering other bills affecting criminal

penalties. Enactment of any such legislation may necessitate additional

guideline amendments in the coming year.

II. Guideline Simplification and Modification

In 1995, the Commission announced that it was initiating a multi-

year project to comprehensively assess and simplify provisions of the

Guidelines Manual. See 60 F.R. 49316-17 (Sept. 22, 1995). After

considering a number of staff papers and input from interested

individuals and groups, the Commission anticipates focusing its

attention and possible amendment consideration on the following

specific issues:

Relevant Conduct. Priority issues for the 1996-97

amendment cycle include: (1) Clarifying/streamlining the relevant

conduct guideline assuming no substantive policy changes; and (2)

developing options to limit the use of acquitted conduct at sentencing.

Issues of lower priority that may be further explored during future

amendment cycles include: (1) Substantively changing the relevant

conduct guideline to limit the extent to which unconvicted conduct can

affect the sentence; and (2) increasing the burden of proof at

sentencing to a ``clear and convincing'' standard.

Level of Detail/Guideline Complexity. Priority issues for

the 1996-97 amendment cycle include: (1) Simplification of guideline/

specific offense characteristics through consolidation or elimination;

(2) clarification of the definition of loss; (3) examination of

problematic cross references; and (4) revision of Acceptance of

Responsibility adjustment.

Departures/Offender Characteristics. Priority issues for

the 1996-97 amendment cycle include: (1) Developing options for

revising/clarifying the language describing the ``heartland concept''

in Chapter One and departure policy statements in Chapter Five in light

of the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Koon v. U.S., No. 94-1664,

1996 WL 315800 (U.S. June 17, 1996); and (2) focusing on family and

[[Page 34466]]

community ties, age, and combination of factors.

Criminal History. Priority issues for the 1996-97

amendment cycle include: (1) Re-ordering and streamlining Chapter Four;

and (2) revising assignment of criminal history points to better target

serious, repeat offenders.

Sentencing Table. Issues of lower immediate priority for

discussion during future amendment cycles include: (1) Options to

streamline sentencing table to reduce significantly the number of

offense levels; (2) options to revise the current sentencing table's

``zone'' structure; and (3) additional or expanded sentencing options.

Appellate Litigation and Other Statutory Issues. Priority

issues for the 1996-97 amendment cycle include: (1) Consideration of

the impact of the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Koon v. United

States, supra, on appellate review of guideline sentences and on the

need to revise the introduction to the Guidelines Manual and Departure

Section (Sec. 5K2.0) to address the deference appellate courts should

afford district courts on guideline determinations; and (2)

consideration of widening the bands in monetary and drug tables to

decrease litigation.

Drug Sentencing/Role in the Offense. Priority issues for

1996-97 amendment cycle include: (1) Revising the Role in the Offense

guideline to better reflect actual experience, case law development,

and to provide sufficient flexibility when sentencing drug offenders.

Introduction to Guidelines Manual. Priority issues for

1996-97 amendment cycle include: (1) Updating the introduction to

reflect the evolution of the guideline sentencing process.

III. Circuit Conflicts, Miscellaneous Amendments

As part of the 1996-97 amendment cycle, the Commission expects to

consider and propose for comment amendments that address some of the

more important application issues involving conflicting court

interpretations of guideline language.

IV. Cocaine Offenses

Under Public Law No. 104-38 (Oct. 30, 1995), the Commission is

directed to submit recommendations to Congress regarding changes in the

penalty statutes and sentencing guidelines for cocaine offenses

(including crack). See 61 FR 80 (January 2, 1996). The Commission has

been gathering and analyzing data and other relevant information,

including public comment, in preparation for formulating the required

recommendations. It expects to continue this process during the coming

months and again invites comment regarding implementation of this

congressional directive. Comment should focus on (1) the quantity ratio

that should be substituted for the current 100-to-1 ratio in the

relevant penalty statutes and sentencing guidelines (see USSG

Sec. 2D1.1(c)), and (2) appropriate enhancements in Sec. 2D1.1 for

violence and other harms associated with crack and powder cocaine.

V. Revisions to Money Laundering Guidelines

As directed by Public Law 104-38, supra, the Commission will

respond to an expected Department of Justice report on money laundering

charging and plea practices and will continue its study of the money

laundering guidelines (U.S.S.G. Secs. 2S1.1-2S1.2).

VI. Guideline Assessment, Research Initiatives

Under the direction of an outside consultant, Commission staff have

initiated a number of research projects designed to assess the success

of the guidelines. See 60 FR 49316-17 (Sept. 22, 1995). These efforts

will continue in the coming year, focusing primarily on the use of an

intensive study sample (ISS) of cases to better evaluate operation of

the Relevant Conduct and Criminal History guidelines.

V. Administrative Initiatives

As indicated in its 1995 work priorities notice, see 60 FR 49316,

17 (Sept. 22, 1995), the Commission is engaged in an ongoing effort to

maximize the efficiency of its limited staff resources. Additionally,

the Commission expects to soon publish for comment a set of Rules of

Practice and Procedure describing its internal operating practices and

the manner in which interested persons can participate in the

Commission's work.

[FR Doc. 96-16873 Filed 7-1-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 2210-40-P