Federal Judiciary

United States v. Charman, No. 08 Cr. 1154-01 (RWS), 2009 WL 4858047 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 9, 2009)

Charman pled guilty to one count of bank robbery and faced an advisory Guidelines range of imprisonment of between 10 and 16 months.  (Obviously, it was a small robbery.)  He was sentenced to time served (we don't know how much that is) -- not much of a variance.  The justification?  He has matured considerably since having committed his crime, has been consistently employed, and has obtained some education.  Thus, the sentence of time-served was appropriate given the defendant's "age, her family situation, potential for employment, and lack of prior criminal history."

Although a low-Guidelines case, I think this shows the power of pre-sentence rehabilitation to effect an outcome.  Put differently, it's never too early to start on a program of self-rehabilition.  And, even if done transparently in anticipation of sentencing, no one can every deny that it is, in fact, being undertaken, regardless of motivation.