In Clearwater, intended loss with intended harm could impact the use of federal sentencing guidelines. For those looking for more information on the process of choosing penalties for a federal criminal offense, contact an experienced federal criminal attorney immediately. An attorney can help give you peace of mind when it comes to understanding harm in Clearwater federal offense cases.
Defining Pecuniary Harm vs. Reasonably Foreseeable Pecuniary Harm
Understanding harm in Clearwater federal offense cases often begins with classifying types of harm and loss. Pecuniary harm is financial harm. Intended loss is considered reasonably foreseeable. An individual who wants to steal a million dollars from 100 people. If the person only gets through 50, but they have a list of another 50 people, just never gets to them all. Since the person intended to steal from those people too, it was foreseeable that the person would be able to steal from them. The Government would count 100 million dollars as their loss rather than 50 million. The degree of harm in federal offense cases is determined by how much was taken, how much was intended to be taken, and how the person determined who they were going to steal from.
Impact of Harm on Mandatory Minimums
Mandatory minimums are affected by calculations. For instance, if the case involves child pornography, they may get assigned a mandatory minimum. If the person was involved in certain drugs and a certain volume of drugs, the person will get a mandatory minimum. It is strictly a threshold a person has to meet to get the mandatory minimum.
Understanding harm in Clearwater federal offense cases requires acknowledging various factors of a case. One is how much money was intended to be stolen. That is a degree of harm. If a Federally Insured Financial Institution is affected or had a chance of collapsing because of this, that is harm. Harm is considered any form of injury or murder. These effects have an impact on the Guideline.
What is the Role of a Judge?
The judge could consider whether the person has a criminal history if they are on probation if they were recently released from prison and the person’s involvement. They also take into account whether there was an alleged vulnerable victim, how many there were and if they were children. In addition, they will take into account whether the person cooperated with the Government of hindered the Government’s investigation.
Types of Evidence to Present in a Federal Offense Case
A common argument is that sentencing overemphasizes the seriousness of the offense. This places an even bigger importance for individuals understanding harm in Clearwater federal offense cases and how this impacts their proceedings. If a conviction for drunk driving is being scored, the defense attorney could tell the judge that drunk driving really should not be increased for the defendant, that it is too high.
The judge could agree that drunk driving is not as serious as the Guidelines really anticipated for that level and lower the level because it overemphasizes the seriousness of the crime. Another example is substantial assistance where the Government states that the charged person cooperated and recommend a four-level departure. The defense attorney could argue that the individual’s cooperation was phenomena and above average.
The defense attorney can argue to the Court that the departure given to the defendant by the Government for cooperating is not enough and that the defendant should get more. The defense attorney would show the defendant’s role on the offense and demonstrate to the judge, by the facts of the case, that the defendant was a minor player and should get a reduction because for their minor role in the offense.