U.S. Sentencing Commission
Final Crack Retroactivity Data Report
Fair Sentencing Act
December 2014
Introduction
As part of its ongoing mission, the United States Sentencing Commission provides
Congress, the judiciary, the executive branch, and the general public with data extracted from
and based on sentencing documents submitted by courts to the Commission. Data is reported on
1
an annual basis in the Commission’s Annual Report and Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing
Statistics.
2
The Commission also reports preliminary data for an on-going fiscal year in order to
provide real-time analysis of sentencing practices in the federal courts. Since 2005, the
Commission has published a series of quarterly reports that are similar in format and
methodology to tables and figures produced in the Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing Statistics or
in the Commission’s Final Report on the Impact of the United States v. Booker on Federal
Sentencing. The quarterly reports contain cumulative data for the on-going fiscal year (i.e., data
3
from the start of the fiscal year through the most current quarter).
This report provides data concerning the retroactive application of the guideline
amendment implementation of the Fair Sentencing Act (FSA), Pub. L. No. 111–220, signed into
law on August 3, 2010. The FSA increased the quantities of crack cocaine that trigger the five
and ten-year statutory mandatory minimum penalties — from five grams to 28 grams for five-
year mandatory minimums and from 50 to 280 grams for ten-year mandatory minimums — and
eliminated the five-year mandatory minimum for simple possession of crack cocaine.
Significantly, the FSA gave the Commission emergency amendment authority to temporarily
change the guidelines to implement the statutory changes and to add certain enhancements and
reductions to the guidelines.
On October 15, 2010 the Commission voted to promulgate Amendment 748, the
emergency amendment which took effect on November 1, 2010. Among other changes,
Amendment 748 made conforming changes to the guidelines to adjust the crack cocaine quantity
levels in the Drug Quantity Table in §2D1.1 to the new statutory minimums, added new
aggravating and mitigating factors in drug trafficking cases, and reflected the elimination of the
statutory five-year mandatory minimum penalty for simple possession of crack cocaine.
On April 28, 2011, the Commission submitted to Congress, Amendment 750, the
permanent guideline amendment implementing the FSA. The three-part amendment (A, B & C)
In each felony or Class A misdemeanor case sentenced in federal court, sentencing courts are required to submit the
1
following documents to the Commission: the judgment and commitment order, the statement of reasons, the plea
agreement (if applicable), the indictment or other charging document, and the presentence report. See 28 U.S.C. §
994(w).
See the Commission’s website, www.ussc.gov, for electronic copies of the 1995-2013 Annual Report and
2
Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing Statistics.
See www.ussc.gov/bf.htm for an electronic copy of the Commission’s Final Report on the Impact of United States
3
v. Booker on Federal Sentencing.
re-promulgated as permanent the temporary emergency amendment and took effect on November
1, 2011.
On June 30, 2011, the Commission voted to promulgate Amendment 759 which added
Parts A and C of Amendment 750 as amendments listed in §1B1.10 (Reduction in Term of
Imprisonment as a Result of an Amended Guideline Range)(Policy Statement) that apply
retroactively. Part A contained the changes to the crack cocaine quantity levels in the Drug
Quantity Table in §2D1.1. Part C deleted the cross reference in §2D2.1 to reflect the elimination
of the statutory minimum for simple possession of crack cocaine. The Commission voted to
make Amendment 759 effective November 1, 2011, the same date that Amendment 750 took
effect.
The data in this report represents information concerning motions for a reduced sentence
pursuant to the retroactive application of Amendment 750. The data in this report reflects all
motions decided through October 31, 2014 and for which court documentation was received,
coded, and edited at the Commission by December 16, 2014. This December 2014 report is the
final report in this series.
District N N % N % District N N % N %
TOTAL 13,990 7,748 55.4 6,242 44.6
Eastern Virginia 897 602 67.1 295 32.9 Western Oklahoma 123 48 39.0 75 61.0
Western North Carolina 683 224 32.8 459 67.2 Middle Louisiana 121 41 33.9 80 66.1
Eastern North Carolina 622 237 38.1 385 61.9 Eastern Michigan 110 101 91.8 9 8.2
Western Virginia 488 253 51.8 235 48.2 Eastern New York 109 35 32.1 74 67.9
South Carolina 427 275 64.4 152 35.6 Southern Mississippi 104 104 100.0 0 0.0
Southern Georgia 417 130 31.2 287 68.8 Western New York 103 91 88.3 12 11.7
Western Texas 407 275 67.6 132 32.4 New Jersey 100 58 58.0 42 42.0
Puerto Rico 371 195 52.6 176 47.4 Eastern Arkansas 100 61 61.0 39 39.0
Middle North Carolina 370 132 35.7 238 64.3 Northern New York 99 81 81.8 18 18.2
Northern Florida 331 104 31.4 227 68.6 Western Pennsylvania 99 54 54.5 45 45.5
Southern Alabama 318 157 49.4 161 50.6 Northern Mississippi 96
67 69.8 29 30.2
Northern Iowa 288 81 28.1 207 71.9 Northern Georgia 96 35 36.5 61 63.5
Western Louisiana 278 105 37.8 173 62.2 Eastern Louisiana 95 95 100.0 0 0.0
Eastern Missouri 273 154 56.4 119 43.6 Eastern Pennsylvania 86 84 97.7 2 2.3
Eastern Texas 250 198 79.2 52 20.8 Western Wisconsin 85 85 100.0 0 0.0
Northern West Virginia 242 241 99.6 1 0.4 Massachusetts 81 45 55.6 36 44.4
Maryland 239 202 84.5 37 15.5 District of Columbia 80 73 91.3 7 8.8
Middle Florida 238 231 97.1 7 2.9 Eastern Kentucky 68 29 42.6 39 57.4
Western Kentucky 233 62 26.6 171 73.4 Alaska 63 32 50.8 31 49.2
Middle Georgia 230 111 48.3 119 51.7 Maine 54 19 35.2 35 64.8
Western Michigan 215 79 36.7 136 63.3 Southern New York 53 33 62.3 20 37.7
Southern Iowa 208 60 28.8 148 71.2 Rhode Island 48 25 52.1
23 47.9
Central Illinois 208 85 40.9 123 59.1 Colorado 48 40 83.3 8 16.7
Northern Texas 198 118 59.6 80 40.4 Central California 45 34 75.6 11 24.4
Middle Pennsylvania 195 146 74.9 49 25.1 Western Arkansas 45 18 40.0 27 60.0
Eastern Tennessee 192 112 58.3 80 41.7 New Hampshire 45 15 33.3 30 66.7
Western Missouri 190 91 47.9 99 52.1 Northern Oklahoma 43 28 65.1 15 34.9
Northern Ohio 185 94 50.8 91 49.2 Northern California 40 37 92.5 3 7.5
Northern Indiana 182 104 57.1 78 42.9 Middle Tennessee 27 27 100.0 0 0.0
Southern Illinois 182 114 62.6 68 37.4 Western Washington 27 26 96.3 1 3.7
Nebraska 170 118 69.4 52 30.6 Eastern California 27 27 100.0 0 0.0
Western Tennessee 164 81 49.4 83 50.6 New Mexico 14 12 85.7 2 14.3
Southern Ohio 159 116 73.0 43 27.0 Eastern Oklahoma 13 13 100.0 0 0.0
Minnesota 157 74 47.1 83 52.9 Delaware 9 9 100.0 0 0.0
Middle Alabama 147 66 44.9 81 55.1 South Dakota 8 8 100.0 0 0.0
Southern Texas 146 85 58.2 61 41.8 Nevada 8 8 100.0 0 0.0
Northern Alabama 143 22 15.4 121 84.6 Utah 7 7 100.0 0 0.0
Northern Illinois 141 139 98.6 2 1.4 Wyoming 6 6 100.0 0 0.0
Kansas 139 109 78.4 30 21.6 Oregon 6 6 100.0 0 0.0
Connecticut 134 48 35.8 86 64.2 Vermont 5 5 100.0 0 0.0
Southern Florida 134 75 56.0 59 44.0 Eastern Washington 5 3 60.0 2 40.0
Southern West Virginia 131 106 80.9 25 19.1 Southern California 4 4 100.0 0 0.0
Eastern Wisconsin 130 60 46.2 70 53.8 Hawaii 2 0 0.0 2 100.0
Southern Indiana 130 47 36.2 83 63.8 Arizona 1 1 100.0 0 0.0
Note: Some districts may not have reported all denials of motions seeking retroactive application of Amendment 750.
SOURCE: U.S. Sentencing Commission, 2008-2014 Datafiles, USSCFY08-USSCFY14.
Table 1
Granted
Denied
Granted
Denied
GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF APPLICATION OF RETROACTIVE CRACK COCAINE AMENDMENT BY DISTRICT
Circuit N Granted Denied
TOTAL 13,990 7,748 6,242
FOURTH CIRCUIT 4,099 2,272 1,827
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 2,054 931 1,123
FIFTH CIRCUIT 1,695 1,088 607
EIGHTH CIRCUIT 1,439 665 774
SIXTH CIRCUIT 1,353 701 652
SEVENTH CIRCUIT 1,058 634 424
FIRST CIRCUIT 599 299 300
SECOND CIRCUIT 503 293 210
THIRD CIRCUIT 489 351 138
TENTH CIRCUIT 393 263 130
NINTH CIRCUIT 228 178 50
D.C. CIRCUIT 80 73 7
SOURCE: U.S. Sentencing Commission, 2008-2014 Datafiles, USSCFY08-USSCFY14.
Table 2
GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF APPLICATION OF
RETROACTIVE CRACK COCAINE AMENDMENT
BY JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
Fiscal Total
Year N N % N %
Total 13,922 7,710 55.4 6,212 44.6
2014 1 0 0.0 1 100.0
2013 15 0 0.0 15 100.0
2012 69 9 13.0 60 87.0
2011 664 213 32.1 451 67.9
2010 1,626 913 56.2 713 43.8
2009 1,974 1,190 60.3 784 39.7
2008 1,905 1,198 62.9 707 37.1
2007 1,489 882 59.2 607 40.8
2006 1,190 694 58.3 496 41.7
2005 963 537 55.8 426 44.2
2004 690 373 54.1 317 45.9
2003 656 334 50.9 322 49.1
2002 439 207 47.2 232 52.8
2001 376 209 55.6 167 44.4
2000 315 143 45.4 172 54.6
1999 291 162 55.7 129 44.3
1998 240 133 55.4 107 44.6
1997 233 117 50.2 116 49.8
1996 206 100 48.5 106 51.5
1995 182 88 48.4 94 51.6
1994 155 78 50.3 77 49.7
1993 109
62 56.9 47 43.1
1992 78 38 48.7 40 51.3
1991 33 16 48.5 17 51.5
1990 19 11 57.9 8 42.1
1989 4 3 75.0 1 25.0
1
Of the 13,990 cases, 68 were excluded from this analysis because the case cannot be matched with an original case in the
Commission's records.
SOURCE: U.S. Sentencing Commission, 2008-2014 Datafiles, USSCFY08-USSCFY14.
Table 3
Granted
Denied
APPLICATION OF RETROACTIVE CRACK COCAINE AMENDMENT BY
YEAR OF ORIGINAL SENTENCE
1
CIRCUIT N N % N % N %
TOTAL 7,084 5,865 82.8 0 0.0 1,219 17.2
D.C. CIRCUIT 69 69 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
FIRST CIRCUIT 292 271 92.8 0 0.0 21 7.2
SECOND CIRCUIT 274 240 87.6 0 0.0 34 12.4
THIRD CIRCUIT 266 260 97.7 0 0.0 6 2.3
FOURTH CIRCUIT 2,132 1,654 77.6 0 0.0 478 22.4
FIFTH CIRCUIT 981 735 74.9 0 0.0 246 25.1
SIXTH CIRCUIT 640 546 85.3 0 0.0 94 14.7
SEVENTH CIRCUIT 610 601 98.5 0 0.0 9 1.5
EIGHTH CIRCUIT 631 561 88.9 0 0.0 70 11.1
NINTH CIRCUIT 136 105 77.2 0 0.0 31 22.8
TENTH CIRCUIT 254 239 94.1 0 0.0 15 5.9
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 799 584 73.1 0 0.0 215 26.9
1
Of the 7,748 cases in which the court granted a motion for a sentence reduction due to retroactive application of the crack cocaine amendment,
670 were excluded from this analysis because the information received by the Commission prevented a determination of motion origin.
Additionally, courts may cite multiple origins for a motion; consequently, the total number of origins cited generally exceeds the total number of
cases. In this table, 7,084 origins were cited for the 7,078 cases.
2
In three cases, documents provided to the Commission indicated that the Bureau of Prisons Director made the motion. Those cases appear to be clerical errors
SOURCE: U.S. Sentencing Commission, 2008-2014 Datafiles, USSCFY08-USSCFY14.
Table 4
ORIGIN OF GRANTED MOTION FOR SENTENCE REDUCTION DUE TO
RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF CRACK COCAINE AMENDMENT
1
Defendant
Director BOP
2
Court
Race/Ethnicity Total N % N %
White 476 435 5.6 41 3.2
Black 7,741 6,607 85.7 1,134 89.9
Hispanic 683 612 7.9 71 5.6
Other 74 58 0.8 16 1.3
Total 8,974 7,712 1,262
Citizenship
U.S. Citizen 8,628 7,419 96.5 1,209 95.9
Non-Citizen 320 268 3.5 52 4.1
Total 8,948 7,687 1,261
Gender
Male 8,601 7,383 95.4 1,218 96.4
Female 400 354 4.6 46 3.6
Total 9,001 7,737 1,264
Average Age
30 30 31
1
The 1,264 offenders represented in this column are those whom the Commission previously identified as eligible
to seek a sentence reduction but whose petition for a reduction was denied by the court. Of the remaining 4,978
cases in which the court denied the request for a sentence reduction, 1,739 were excluded from this analysis
because the offender was not previously identified as eligible to seek a sentence reduction for one or more reasons
(see 'Analysis of the Impact of the Guideline Implementation of the Fair Sentencing Act If Made Retroactive'
(May 20, 2011) available at www.ussc.gov). Of the remaining 3,239 cases, 2,435 were excluded from this analysis
because the offender had been identified as released or projected to be released prior to November 1, 2011
and so was excluded from the Commission's prior analysis of eligible offenders, 298 were excluded from this
analysis because the offender was not sentenced for a drug offense, 476 were excluded from this analysis
because crack cocaine was not involved in the offense, and 30 were excluded from this analysis because
the reason for the court's decision cannot yet be determined.
SOURCE: U.S. Sentencing Commission, 2008-2014 Datafiles, USSCFY08-USSCFY14.
Denied
1
Table 5
Granted
DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF OFFENDERS CONSIDERED FOR
SENTENCE REDUCTION DUE TO APPLICATION OF RETROACTIVE
CRACK COCAINE AMENDMENT
All Cases Granted
Denied
1
% % %
Weapon
Weapon Specific Offense Characteristic
29.1
28.5 33.2
Firearms Mandatory Minimum Applied 14.4 13.9 18.0
Safety Valve 4.8 5.4 1.3
Guideline Role Adjustments
Aggravating Role (USSG §3B1.1) 13.7 12.4 21.4
Mitigating Role (USSG §3B1.2) 1.5 1.5 1.1
Obstruction Adjustment (USSG §3C1.1)
7.8 7.2
11.6
Sentence Relative to the Guideline Range
Within Range 72.0 72.1 71.2
Above Range 1.0 1.0 1.3
Below Range 27.0 26.9 27.5
Criminal History Category
I 16.2 16.8 13.0
II 11.5 11.4 12.3
III 20.7 20.4 22.0
IV 17.3 17.8 14.3
V 13.2 13.6 10.7
VI 21.1 20.0 27.8
1
The 1,264 offenders represented in this column are those whom the Commission previously identified as eligible to seek a sentence reduction
but whose petition for a reduction was denied by the court. Of the remaining 4,978 cases in which the court denied the request for a sentence
reduction, 1,739 were excluded from this analysis because the offender was not previously identified as eligible to seek a sentence reduction for
one or more reasons (see 'Analysis of the Impact of the Guideline Implementation of the Fair Sentencing Act If Made Retroactive'
(May 20, 2011) available at www.ussc.gov). Of the remaining 3,239 cases, 2,435 were excluded from this analysis because the offender had been
identified as released or projected to be released prior to November 1, 2011 and so was excluded from the Commission's prior analysis of
eligible offenders, 298 were excluded from this analysis because the offender was not sentenced for a drug offense, 476 were excluded from this
analysis because crack cocaine was not involved in the offense, and 30 were excluded from this analysis because the reason for the court's
decision cannot yet be determined.
SOURCE: U.S. Sentencing Commission, 2008-2014 Datafiles, USSCFY08-USSCFY14.
SELECTED SENTENCING FACTORS FOR OFFENDERS WHO WERE CONSIDERED FOR
SENTENCE REDUCTION DUE TO APPLICATION OF RETROACTIVE CRACK COCAINE
AMENDMENT
Table 6
N % N %
TOTAL 2,424 100.0 2,424 100.0
Guideline Minimum 1,533 63.2 1,440 59.4
Lower Half of Range 421 17.4 366 15.1
Midpoint of Range 132 5.4 168 6.9
Upper Half of Range 183 7.5 236 9.7
Guideline Maximum 155 6.4 214 8.8
1
Of the 7,748 cases in which a motion for retroactive application of the crack cocaine amendment was granted, 4,032 received a sentence within the guideline range at
both their original and current sentencing. Of these, 1,608 cases were excluded from this analysis due to one or more of the following reasons: the case is missing
sentence length or guideline relevant statutory information from the new sentence (964), the case is missing sentence length or guideline relevant statutory
information from the original sentence (566), the new sentence had a guideline minimum and maximum that were identical (394) or the original sentence had a guideline
minimum and maximum that were identical (62).
SOURCE: U.S. Sentencing Commission, 2008-2014 Datafiles, USSCFY08-USSCFY14.
SENTENCE REDUCTION DUE TO APPLICATION OF RETROACTIVE
POSITION OF WITHIN RANGE SENTENCES FOR OFFENDERS GRANTED A
Table 7
ORIGINAL SENTENCE
CURRENT SENTENCE
CRACK COCAINE AMENDMENT
1
Average Average
Current New Average Decrease Average Percent
CIRCUIT Sentence Sentence in Months From Decrease From
District N in Months in Months Current Sentence Current Sentence
TOTAL 6,880 153 123 30 19.9
D.C. CIRCUIT 54 130 104 26 20.0
District of Columbia 54 130 104 26 20.0
FIRST CIRCUIT 267 119 100 19 16.1
Maine 19 119 99 20 15.6
Massachusetts 31 147 118 29 18.8
New Hampshire 13 107 91 17 19.2
Puerto Rico 189 114 96 18 15.6
Rhode Island
15 131 112 19 13.9
SECOND CIRCUIT
213 141 113 28 20.0
Connecticut 30 156 132 24 14.2
New York
Eastern
32 145 106 39 24.5
Northern 55 149 120 30 21.0
Southern
32 148 118 31 20.9
Western 60 122 99 23 19.4
Vermont 4 118 99 19 16.5
THIRD CIRCUIT 296 141 115 26 18.4
Delaware
9 169 144 25 13.4
New Jersey 54 114 90 23 20.7
Pennsylvania
Eastern
69 176 145 31 17.7
Middle 120 136 109 26 20.1
Western
44 127 109 18 13.1
Virgin Islands 0 -- -- -- --
FOURTH CIRCUIT
2,011 163 131 32 20.0
Maryland 129 176 136 41 22.4
North Carolina
Eastern 233 177 142 34 19.4
Middle 131 194 157 37 18.6
Western 164 184
151 32 16.7
South Carolina 263 166 132 34 20.4
Virginia
Eastern 507 164 134 31 18.3
Western 240 158 130 28 18.2
West Virginia
Northern 240 121 92 29 25.5
Southern 104 148 112 36 24.0
Table 8
DEGREE OF DECREASE IN SENTENCE DUE TO RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF
CRACK COCAINE AMENDMENT
1
Average Average
Current New Average Decrease Average Percent
CIRCUIT Sentence Sentence in Months From Decrease From
District N in Months in Months Current Sentence Current Sentence
FIFTH CIRCUIT 993 147 117 30 21.2
Louisiana
Eastern 90 130 104 26 21.0
Middle
27 165 136 28 16.8
Western 98 189 157 33 18.5
Mississippi
Northern 48 145 111 34 24.7
Southern 79 148 117 31 21.8
Texas
Eastern 197 132 103 28 21.8
Northern 117 183 149 34 19.3
Southern 65 177 142 36 19.4
Western 272 123 96 27 22.8
SIXTH CIRCUIT
663 134 108 26 20.2
Kentucky
Eastern 19 128 101 27 24.0
Western
62 103 82 20 20.3
Michigan
Eastern
87 147 115 32 21.9
Western 79 152 126 26 17.0
Ohio
Northern
91 122 97 26 21.0
Southern 116 142 117 26 19.1
Tennessee
Eastern 112 134 108 27 21.1
Middle 26 161 126 35 20.3
Western
71 121 98 23 20.2
SEVENTH CIRCUIT 583 168 135 32 19.4
Illinois
Central 76 160 132 28 18.5
Northern 135 170 139 31 17.3
Southern
111 186 148 38 21.4
Indiana
Northern
102 147 117 30 21.0
Southern 36 235 190 45
19.5
Wisconsin
Eastern 57 132 107 25 18.0
Western 66 165 130 35 20.6
EIGHTH CIRCUIT 585 144 116 28 19.6
Arkansas
Eastern 59 116 91 25 23.9
Western 17 111 90 21 20.3
Iowa
Northern 73 190 151 39 19.7
Southern 60 184 151 33 17.4
Minnesota 55 151 127 24 15.6
Missouri
Eastern 138 120 95 24 20.7
Western 59 155 121 33 19.0
Nebraska 117 136 110 26 19.5
North Dakota 0 -- -- -- --
South Dakota 7 100 73 28 19.2
Table 8 (continued)
DEGREE OF DECREASE IN SENTENCE DUE TO RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF
CRACK COCAINE AMENDMENT
Average Average
Current New Average Decrease Average Percent
CIRCUIT Sentence Sentence in Months From Decrease From
District N in Months in Months Current Sentence Current Sentence
NINTH CIRCUIT 174 116 92 24 20.8
Alaska 32 129 102 27 21.0
Arizona 1 -- -- -- --
California
Central 33 116 93 23 22.0
Eastern 27 120 96 24 21.2
Northern 35 97 79 18 19.3
Southern 4 135 97 38 25.7
Guam
0 -- -- -- --
Hawaii 0 -- -- -- --
Idaho 0 -- -- -- --
Montana 0 -- -- -- --
Nevada 7 171 131 40 21.8
Northern Mariana Islands
0 --
--
-- --
Oregon
6 122 86 36 30.2
Washington
Eastern 3 67 50 17 27.0
Western 26 105 88 17 16.0
TENTH CIRCUIT
215 165 133 31 18.7
Colorado 35 167 134 33 18.1
Kansas 85 139 113 26 17.7
New Mexico
10 139 120 19 16.7
Oklahoma
Eastern
13 127 99 28 22.6
Northern 22 171 147 24 14.2
Western 38 248 197 51 20.2
Utah
6 155 117 38 30.4
Wyoming 6 98 72 26 27.4
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 826 174 139 34 20.4
Alabama
Middle
65 152 124 27 19.1
Northern 19 194 150 44 21.3
Southern
134 219 174 45 19.9
Florida
Middle 228 159 130 30 20.5
Northern 90 249 200 49 19.5
Southern 65 143 116 27 18.1
Georgia
Middle 111 123 95 29 24.0
Northern 33 203 166 37 18.0
Southern 81 152 122 30 20.6
1
Of the 13,990 cases, 68 were excluded from this analysis because the case cannot be matched with an original case in the Commission's records and 6,212
were excluded from this analysis because the court denied the motion for a sentence reduction. Of the remaining 7,710 cases, 830 were excluded from this analysis
because the offender was sentenced to time served and the resulting term of imprisonment could not be determined from the records received by the Commission.
SOURCE: U.S. Sentencing Commission, 2008-2014 Datafiles, USSCFY08-USSCFY14.
DEGREE OF DECREASE IN SENTENCE DUE TO RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF
CRACK COCAINE AMENDMENT
Table 8 (continued)
REASONS N %
Offense does not involve crack cocaine 369 5.3
Case does not involve crack cocaine 286 4.1
Sentence is determined by a non-drug guideline 83 1.2
Offender not eligible under §1B1.10 4,635 66.5
Statutory mandatory minimum controls sentence 1,771 25.4
Career Offender or Armed Career Criminal provisions control sentence
1,368 19.6
Guideline range does not change 873 12.5
Base offense level does not change (due to multiple drugs) 192 2.8
Case involved more than 8.4 kg of crack cocaine 178 2.6
Original sentence has been served 119 1.7
Case involved more than 4.5 kg of crack cocaine 110 1.6
Statutory maximum sentence is less than applicable guideline range
21 0.3
Base offense level is 43 3 0.0
Denied on the merits 1,010 14.4
Offender has already benefitted from departure or variance 283 4.1
Offender subject to guideline reduction at original sentencing 173 2.5
18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors 170 2.4
Protection of the public 114 1.6
Already received crack reduction 92 1.3
Post-sentencing or post-conviction conduct 83 1.2
Denial because of binding plea 71 1.0
Previous variance or departure for crack/powder disparity 24 0.3
No reason provided/Other reason 965 13.8
No reason provided 726 10.4
Other 239 3.4
1
Courts may cite multiple reasons for denying a motion; consequently, the total number of reasons cited generally exceeds the total
number of cases. In this table, 6,979 reasons were cited for the 6,242 cases. Of the 726 cases in which the court did not give a reason
for the denial, 595 were previously identified as ineligible by the Commission for sentence reduction ( see 'Analysis of the Impact
of the Crack Cocaine Amendment If Made Retroactive' (May 20, 2011) available at www.ussc.gov). Of those 595 cases, a statutory
mandatory minimum controlled the sentence in 37 cases, in 15 cases the quantity of crack cocaine in the case exceeded 8.4 Kg,
in 37 cases the sentence was determined by a non-drug guideline, in 23 cases no change in the guideline range was found, in 83
cases crack cocaine was not involved, in 71 cases Career Offender or Armed Career Criminal provisions controlled the sentence, in
315 cases the offender was predicted to have been released, in seven cases the Bureau of Prisons informed the Commission that the
offender was no longer serving time for the instant offense, in one case the base offense level was 12 or lower and in six cases
there was no record on file with the Bureau of Prisons.
SOURCE: U.S. Sentencing Commission, 2008-2014 Datafiles, USSCFY08-USSCFY14.
Table 9
REASONS GIVEN BY SENTENCING COURTS FOR DENIAL OF MOTION
1
