The Executive Who Practiced His Apology for Weeks and Still Got 18 Extra Months

Mackenzie Shirilla Is Documenting Herself Into a Life Sentence

58 pages of conduct reports. Sex toys on a video visit. Stolen earrings from the kindwear room. Fake eyelashes. Mackenzie Shirilla has a 2037 parole hearing. Parole boards don't believe words. They look at records. She is off to a bad start. Justin Paperny

Federal Sentencing Guidelines: Why You Don't Have a Math Problem

Most defendants I speak with think they have a math problem. Loss amount, offense level, criminal history points. They obsess over the guideline range and do nothing to change it. Earlier today I spoke with a defendant back east who has spent weeks on the math and almost no time building the record that actually moves the outcome. This episode is about that mistake. Federal sentencing guidelines give a judge a starting point, not a final answer. I have been to more than 1,500 sentencing hearings since I came home from Taft Federal Prison Camp in 2008. I have heard judges mock defendants who claimed conduct they could not document. I have watched upper-guideline sentences handed down because a man wrote a letter saying he cared about his family but never once identified with the people he hurt. And I have watched defendants get below-guideline sentences because they sold the second car, moved to a smaller house, sat for a proffer, and kept every record. In this episode I walk through what judges actually say at sentencing, what the sentencing memorandum cannot do for you, and what thirty to ninety minutes a day between now and your hearing can build that no lawyer can manufacture after the fact. If you have been charged, are a target of an investigation, or are waiting for someone else to engineer your outcome, this episode is for you. The guidelines are only the guidelines. What you do today is the record.

The Executive Who Practiced His Apology for Weeks and Still Got 18 Extra Months

He rehearsed his apology for weeks and still got 18 extra months. In this episode, I explain why vague remorse fails in federal court, what judges actually look for, and why the people who get better outcomes usually start building their case for leniency long before sentencing day.

What Are the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and How Do They Work?

Key Takeaways * The federal sentencing guidelines create a point-based system using offense level and criminal history to produce a recommended range in months. * Every enhancement — loss amount, victims, position of trust, obstruction — adds points and directly extends the likely sentence. * The guidelines are advisory after Booker, but judges calculate them in every case and explain any deviation. Most sentences remain within or near the range. * The Presentence Investigation Report is the document that carries your guideline calculation forward through the entire prison system. The PSR interview is one of the most important moments in the process. * Understanding your likely range early gives you time to influence it. Our federal sentence calculator provides that number before your attorney, the probation officer, or the judge does. Justin Paperny

Federal Sentencing Guidelines 101: How to Calculate Your Prison Range

The federal sentencing guidelines exist because before 1987, two people convicted of the same crime could receive wildly different sentences depending on which judge they drew. Congress decided that was unacceptable. The Sentencing Reform Act fixed it — at least on paper. Here's what most defendants don't know: the guidelines are advisory. United States v. Booker made that clear in 2005. Judges must calculate them. They don't have to follow them. This episode explains how the grid works — your offense level on one axis, criminal history category on the other — and what moves each number. Three levels off for a genuine guilty plea. Role adjustments that can add or subtract years. Cooperation motions that can go below a mandatory minimum. These aren't technicalities. They're levers. We also share something Judge Stephen Bough told Michael directly: the guidelines are generic. The 3553(a) factors are where the judge finally looks at you as a human being — your history, your circumstances, what you need to become a contributing member of society. That's your opening. The defendant who shows up with nothing gets sentenced by the grid. The defendant who shows up with a documented human story gives the judge something to work with. The math is the starting point. The record you build is what changes it. Best, Justin Paperny