Dear FAMMily,

We have heard from you over the years about the cruelty of the career offender guideline. Now is your chance to be part of fixing it!  The U.S. Sentencing Commission (“The Commission”) wants to hear from you. The Commission, which writes the federal Sentencing Guidelines that judges use to calculate a sentencing guideline range, is proposing changes that we think you will want to know about and weigh in on.

One set of proposals could significantly change who can be sentenced as a career offender.

Individuals who are sentenced in federal court for a controlled substance offense or a crime of violence can receive stiff sentences.  Those who also have two prior felony convictions for a crime of violence and/or a controlled substance offense can be sentenced as a “career offender.”

The implications of being considered a “career offender” are significant. The defendant is automatically placed into the most severe criminal history category – VI – and their offense level is calculated based on the statutory maximum. That means their recommended guideline sentence is usually much higher than the base offense level for their conviction by itself would otherwise be.

For a long time, deciding what constitutes a prior “controlled substance offense” or “crime of violence” has perplexed courts across the country.  What might appear to us as a rather straightforward question is, in reality, quite complicated. The Commission has received feedback from stakeholders who suggested that it should revisit and better define which offenses qualify as predicate offenses to trigger the career offender enhancement. In response, the Commission has proposed several revisions to the career offender guideline that address the issue of what should be considered prior offenses that label a defendant as a career offender.

The Commission’s proposals are very complex. Rather than asking you to dig into the details, we think the Commission should hear from you about how the career offender guideline impacted your or your loved one’s sentence. We know that so many people have had higher guideline ranges because of the career offender designation. Even the name alone, “career offender,” paints someone as if they have made an entire career out of crime. But we know that some of your loved ones, such as those who received this enhancement based on minor state drug offenses, did not deserve to be sentenced or labeled that way.  

Hopefully in telling your stories, you can share with the Commission the human face of the “career offender” guideline and how it has unfairly shaped your or your loved one’s sentence.

In addition to changes to the career offender guideline, the Commission has proposed a few other changes including to firearm offenses and the Booker three-step process. You can read all of their proposals here. [link removed]

The Commission has asked the public to comment on its proposals. Please write to the Commission and tell them what you think. You can use our suggested comments on career offender below or you can write your own comments. Be sure to share your personal experience if you are comfortable doing so (remember these comments are public).

The deadline for comments is February 3. You can submit them here. [link removed]

Proposed language for Commission comments:

The image conjured by “career offender” often bears little or no resemblance to the individuals sentenced with that label.

For too long, many people have been subject to heightened punishment under the career offender guideline, receiving lengthy prison sentences based on crimes that simply do not fit the punishment. The designation “career offender” was created to target serial recidivists. But for too long, it has swept in people with substance abuse disorder; people who are street-level drug dealers; people who are simply not “career criminals.”  Moreover, the career offender guideline exacerbates racial disparities in sentencing; over half of the people subject to these enhanced penalties are Black.

These issues with the career offender guidelines certainly applied to my loved one’s case. [insert personal stories if you have them].

I hope that any change the Commission makes will cure these problems, and will help reduce the number of people subject to the career offender guideline.

Sincerely, 
Shanna Rifkin
Deputy General Counsel


FAMM
1100 H Street NW
Suite 1000
Washington, DC xxxxxx
United States
If you believe you received this message in error or wish to no longer receive email from us, please unsubscribe: [link removed] .