Federal Commercialized Vice Sentences in the Eastern District of North Carolina, FY2016–2025
Of the 30 people sentenced for commercialized vice offenses in the Eastern District of North Carolina, 26 were sentenced under a gambling guideline. 21 (70%) received a prison term, with a median of 12 months, and all 30 pleaded guilty.
· Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 6 min read
Trends › Federal Prosecution Analysis › Federal Sentences in the Eastern District of North Carolina, › Commercialized Vice: Eastern District of North Carolina
In brief: Of the 30 people sentenced for commercialized vice offenses in the Eastern District of North Carolina, 26 were sentenced under a gambling guideline. 21 (70%) received a prison term, with a median of 12 months, and all 30 pleaded guilty.
This post uses the U.S. Sentencing Commission's records of 30 people sentenced in federal court in fiscal years 2016 to 2025. Acquittals and dismissals come from a second source, the Federal Judicial Center's records of 753,808 federal defendants whose cases ended in fiscal years 2016 to 2025. It is part of the Federal Prosecution Analysis series, which builds on Military Moves Toward Sentencing Guidelines to Mirror the Federal System. How the numbers were built: How the Federal Comparison Data Was Built.
Mostly Gambling Offenses
The Commission sorts each case into an offense type by its primary guideline, and commercialized vice is one of those types. Here, 26 of the 30 people were sentenced under §2E3.1 (Gambling Offenses).
The other 4 were sentenced under §2G1.1 (Promoting a Commercial Sex Act or Prohibited Sexual Conduct with an Individual Other than a Minor). The 30 cases were less than 1% of the 7,801 people sentenced in the district in fiscal years 2016 to 2025.
A Cluster of Cases in One Fiscal Year
Fiscal years 2016 to 2019 had 23 people, and fiscal years 2020 to 2025 had 7. Fiscal year 2018 alone had 18 people, as the table shows. The cases are concentrated in a single year, so the overall figures mostly describe that year.
The records list cases only through fiscal year 2021. The yearly medians rest on very few people in most years, and the records cannot show why 2018 had so many.
| Fiscal year | People sentenced | Median prison | Pleaded guilty |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | 1 | 84 months | 1 of 1 |
| 2017 | 3 | 18 months | 3 of 3 |
| 2018 | 18 | 12 months | 100% |
| 2019 | 1 | 12 months | 1 of 1 |
| 2020 | 5 | 6 months | 5 of 5 |
| 2021 | 2 | 30 months | 2 of 2 |
Prison and Probation
21 of the 30 people (70%) were sent to prison, and 8 (27%) received probation only, with no prison or other confinement. For all 94 districts, 70% of the 992 people in this offense type were sent to prison, the same share as here.
The median prison term in this district was 12 months. A quarter received 30 months or more, and a quarter received 8 months or less. For all districts, the median was 18 months. For all offenses in this district, it was 60 months.
Guilty Pleas Without Exception
All 30 people (100%) pleaded guilty, and none went to trial. For all districts, 97% pleaded guilty. Among the guilty pleas here, 97% had a written plea agreement and 3% were straight pleas with no agreement.
A mandatory minimum prison term applied to 0 of the 30 people with that information recorded (0%).
Where Sentences Fell Against the Guideline Range
Only 27% (8) of the 30 sentences were within the guideline range. 43% (13) were below it at the government's request, and 13% (4) were below it without a government request. 17% (5) were above it.
For all districts, 42% of sentences in this offense type were within the range. For all offenses in this district, 56% were. Within-range sentences were less common here than in either comparison group.
Supervised Release, Fines, and Criminal History
Supervised release after prison was ordered for 20 people (67%), with a median term of 36 months. A fine was ordered for 10 (33%) and restitution for 2 (7%).
On criminal history, 73% fell in category I, the lowest, and 0% in category VI, the highest. Court-martial records have no criminal history field.
Limits of These Figures
This file leaves out acquittals and dismissals because it covers only people convicted and sentenced. It also reports terms as imposed, which can differ from time served.
The district also contains Camp Lejeune, Fort Bragg, Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, and Seymour Johnson AFB. Cases at those installations go to military courts-martial and are not counted here.
How We Counted
Everyone sentenced in federal court in the Eastern District of North Carolina (U.S. Sentencing Commission district label "N Carolina East") in fiscal years 2016 to 2025 whose offense type was "Commercialized Vice" (30). Offense types are the Commission's OFFGUIDE categories.
Federal fiscal years run from October 1 to September 30. No person, judge, or lawyer is identified in any of these records.
What to Keep in Mind
No parole in federal prison; credit for good conduct. Federal prison has no parole for crimes committed on or after November 1, 1987. A federal prisoner can earn up to 54 days of good conduct credit for each year of the sentence the judge imposed, which is about 15%. Some federal prisoners can also earn First Step Act time credits, but many offenses make a person ineligible. The numbers in this post are the sentences judges imposed, not the time people actually served.
Federal supervised release. Most federal prison sentences are followed by a term of supervised release that the judge sets as part of the sentence. A person who violates it can be sent back to prison. A court-martial cannot sentence anyone to supervision after release. Military parole and mandatory supervised release are decided later by a board, not by the judge at trial.
Who decides the sentence, and under what rules. Federal judges sentence every federal case. They must calculate the Sentencing Guidelines range, which is advisory, and must impose any mandatory minimum the statute requires unless an exception applies. In courts-martial, the accused could choose sentencing by members until the rules changed. For cases in which every guilty finding is for an offense committed after December 27, 2023, a military judge sentences alone, within sentencing parameters. Courts-martial tried in 2024 and later include both old-rule and new-rule cases, and the data cannot tell them apart.
Time periods. Federal numbers are by federal fiscal year (October 1 to September 30), based on the sentencing date. The military numbers are by trial date. Neither source has the date of the offense, so a change in law shows up in either data set gradually.
How life sentences and "time served" are counted. In the federal numbers, a life sentence is counted as 470 months, and any other sentence longer than 470 months is counted as just under 470 months. A sentence of "time served" is counted as one day (0.03 months). Averages are affected by these rules; medians much less.
Related Analysis
- Military Moves Toward Sentencing Guidelines to Mirror the Federal System (the background article)
- Federal Prosecution Analysis (all federal posts)
- How the Federal Comparison Data Was Built (sources and method)
- Federal Sentences in the Eastern District of North Carolina, FY2016–2025 (overview)
- Federal Drug Trafficking Sentences in the Eastern District of North Carolina, FY2016–2025 (same district, other offense type)
- Federal Firearms Sentences in the Eastern District of North Carolina, FY2016–2025 (same district, other offense type)
- Federal Other Offense Sentences in the Eastern District of North Carolina, FY2016–2025 (same district, other offense type)
- Federal Fraud, Theft, and Embezzlement Sentences in the Eastern District of North Carolina, FY2016–2025 (same district, other offense type)
- U.S. Sentencing Commission, Individual Offender Datafiles (source)
- Federal Judicial Center, Integrated Database (criminal defendants) (source)
About the author. Jocelyn C. Stewart is a retired Army JAG with more than 24 years of trying courts-martial and more than 200 jury trials. She hosts Where All The Bodies Are Buried and runs the Law Office of Jocelyn C. Stewart. This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.