[quote=“Feiren”]Wikipedia says:
[quote]
Acceptance of responsibility is a provision in the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines providing for a decrease by 2 or 3 levels in offenders’ offense level for admitting guilt and otherwise demonstrating behavior consistent with acceptance of responsibility, such as ending criminal conduct and associations. It amounts to a sentence reduction of about 35%.[1] The 3-level reduction is only available to defendants with an offense level of 16 or greater, and it requires a timely guilty plea. Federal plea agreements usually include a stipulation that the government will support granting the defendant the acceptance of responsibility reduction. The guideline states, in reference to the 2-level reduction:[2]
“ This adjustment is not intended to apply to a defendant who puts the government to its burden of proof at trial by denying the essential factual elements of guilt, is convicted, and only then admits guilt and expresses remorse. Conviction by trial, however, does not automatically preclude a defendant from consideration for such a reduction. In rare situations a defendant may clearly demonstrate an acceptance of responsibility for his criminal conduct even though he exercises his constitutional right to a trial. This may occur, for example, where a defendant goes to trial to assert and preserve issues that do not relate to factual guilt (e.g., to make a constitutional challenge to a statute or a challenge to the applicability of a statute to his conduct). In each such instance, however, a determination that a defendant has accepted responsibility will be based primarily upon pre-trial statements and conduct. ”
Because the vast majority of federal criminal cases are settled by plea bargains, the application of this reduction is extremely common and has a great impact on the amount of prisoner-years served altogether throughout the U.S. justice system. Research indicates that the offender’s race/ethnicity, controlling for offender and offense characteristics, has a significant influence on the sentence reduction for acceptance of responsibility.[3] The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has held that “lack of remorse” and “acceptance of responsibility” can be separate factors and that a district court may consider each independently of the other.[/quote][/quote]
Well, I’ve been informed more than once that I’m not in Kansas anymore, but just in case the above is a suggestion that we are sorta in Kansas:
[quote]The major question presented by these consolidated appeals from judgments of sentence on pleas of guilty is whether the sentencing procedures trenched upon appellants’ Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. We conclude that the procedures did and, accordingly, we vacate the sentences appealed from and remand for resentencing on the pleas previously entered.
. . . the [sentencing] Court stated
[quote]
You participated in it. You were caught and to this day, in the view of this Court, you have shown not the slightest degree of remorse.[/quote]
The appellants were put to a Hobson’s choice: remain silent and lose the opportunity to be the objects of leniency, or speak and run the risk of additional prosecution. A price tag was thus placed on appellants’ expectation of maximum consideration at the bar of justice: they had to waive the protection afforded them by the Fifth Amendment. This price was too high. We, therefore, cannot permit the sentences to stand.[/quote] –U. S. v. Garcia, U. S. Third Circuit, 1976
[quote]There can be no doubt that the constitution continues to operate, even after a valid conviction, in the sentencing process.
. . . a court may not punish an individual by imposing a heavier sentence for the exercise of first amendment rights.
A sentence based to any degree on activity or beliefs protected by the first amendment is constitutionally invalid.[/quote]–U. S. v. Lemon, D. C. Circuit, 1983
(Note: If any of the above holdings have been overruled, criticized, questioned, etc., my apologies for not Shepardizing them. I don’t know how much Shepard’s charges, but I bet it’s more than I’m willing to pay.)