• Home
  • Articles
  • Attorney Profiles
    • Richard G. Convicer
    • Robert J. Percy
  • Areas of Practice
    • Business Planning and Formation
    • Civil Tax Controversies & Litigation
    • Connecticut Tax Issues
    • Criminal Tax Fraud
    • Employee Benefits
    • Estate Planning
    • IRS Representation
  • Firm News
  • Contact Us

Call us today! (860) 657-9040

Find us on Map
Convicer & Percy, LLP Convicer & Percy, LLP Convicer & Percy, LLP Convicer & Percy, LLP
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Attorney Profiles
    • Richard G. Convicer
    • Robert J. Percy
  • Areas of Practice
    • Business Planning and Formation
    • Civil Tax Controversies & Litigation
    • Connecticut Tax Issues
    • Criminal Tax Fraud
    • Employee Benefits
    • Estate Planning
    • IRS Representation
  • Firm News
  • Contact Us

Departure or Variance? Distinction Significant

Home IRS Representation Departure or Variance? Distinction Significant

Departure or Variance? Distinction Significant

Posted by Convicer Percy | IRS Representation |

In United States v. Fumo, 655 F.3d 288 (3d Cir. 2011), the Third Circuit vacated the defendants’ sentence in part because the district court failed to articulate clearly whether its sentencing procedure was a departure or a variance.

During his three decades as Pennsylvania state senator, Vincent J. Fumo (“Fumo”) engaged in a wide-ranging scheme to use state funds and employees for his personal benefit. He was convicted on 137 counts of fraud, tax evasion, and obstruction of justice. At sentencing, the district court first calculated a combined offense level of 32, resulting in a Guidelines range of 121 to 151 months’ imprisonment. The court then stated it would grant a “departure” for Fumo’s extraordinary public service and sentenced Fumo to 55 months’ imprisonment and $2,084,979 in restitution. The district court subsequently stated that its sentencing procedure was “perhaps more akin to that associated with a variance than a downward departure” but that “the argument over which it was elevates form over substance.” 655 F.3d at 301.

On appeal, the Third Circuit explained that a “departure” diverges from the originally calculated sentencing range for reasons contained in the Guidelines themselves, whereas a “variance” diverges from the Guidelines range, including any departures, based on an exercise of the court’s discretion under § 3553(a). The court cautioned that the distinction between the two is important because a district court has more discretion in imposing a variance, and a sentence resulting from a variance is subject only to substantive reasonableness review, a lower standard than that applied to departures.

In this case, the appellate court noted that the district court’s statements indicated it was uncertain whether it was departing or varying. Here, the distinction was particularly significant because Third Circuit precedent places certain limitations on courts’ abilities to depart based on the good works of public officials. Accordingly, the court vacated Fumo’s sentence and remanded with instructions to first calculate the final Guidelines range, including any departures, and then consider whether the § 3553(a) factors weigh in favor of a variance. The appellate court emphasized that, to the extent the district court’s sentencing reduction was a departure rather than a variance, the district court erred by failing to calculate a new, final Guidelines range after granting the departure.

Share

Leave a Reply

Your email is safe with us.
Cancel Reply

Areas of Practice

  • IRS Representation
  • Connecticut Tax Issues
  • Estate Planning
  • Business Planning and Formation
  • Employee Benefits

Recent Firm News

  • Convicer & Percy ranked Tier 1 by U. S. News
  • Richard Convicer Honored by Tax Insitute
  • Attorneys Convicer & Percy present at Connecticut Bar Assoc.
  • Convicer & Percy Teach Tax Procedure for CT Bar
  • Richard Convicer speaks at the NE Tax Institute

Contact Us

We're currently offline. Send us an email and we'll get back to you, asap.

Send Message
Contact a Tax Lawyer in Connecticut or Massachusetts! Contact Us Today!
Mailing Address
P.O. Box 2014
Brookline, MA 02446
Phone: (860) 657-9040
Fax: (860) 657-9039

Areas of Practice

  • IRS Representation
  • Connecticut Tax Issues
  • Estate Planning
  • Business Planning and Formation
  • Employee Benefits

© 2021 · Convicer & Percy, LLP · All Rights Reserved

Prev Next