The fraud Guideline's focus on loss can result in extraordinarily high sentencing calculations in white collar fraud cases--high enough in some instances to justify a result of life in prison.  Many judges view the fraud Guidelines as excessive.  They believe that life imprisonment or double-digit sentences are often unwarranted, and they are exercising their discretion to impose more lenient, non-Guidelines sentences based on a defendant's individual history and characteristics.  Other judges have imposed multiple decade sentences, and sentences that were or effectively amounted to life sentences.  The Justice Department's Office of Policy and Legislation takes issue with the group of judges who view the loss table as inflated and decries the evolution of "two distinct and very different sentencing regimes," one that follows the Guidelines and one that does not. 

This program will examine the operation of the Sentencing Guidelines in high-loss fraud cases and ask whether and what reforms are needed.  Should we adjust the fraud Guidelines to reduce the sentencing impact of high-loss calculations and cause judges to be more uniform in following the present Guidelines by imposing mandatory minimums?  Or are the fraud Guidelines appropriate in most cases, and should we rely on prosecutorial discretion, judicial discretion and, if necessary, the appellate process to protect against unreasonable sentences?