NewKnow Your Judge: the court-martial record of 294 military judges → NewLearn Your Lawyer: the court-martial record of 335 military lawyers →
Where All The Bodies Are Buried
Understanding Trends

Federal Fraud, Theft, and Embezzlement Sentences in the Northern District of Indiana, FY2016–2025

Of 428 people sentenced for fraud, theft, or embezzlement in the Northern District of Indiana in fiscal years 2016 to 2025, 249 (58%) received a prison term and 139 (32%) received probation only. In all 94 federal districts, 73% were sent to prison. Restitution was ordered for 362 people (85%).

Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 6 min read

Trends › Federal Prosecution Analysis › Federal Sentences in the Northern District of Indiana, FY201 › Fraud, Theft, and Embezzlement: Northern District of Indiana

In brief: Of 428 people sentenced for fraud, theft, or embezzlement in the Northern District of Indiana in fiscal years 2016 to 2025, 249 (58%) received a prison term and 139 (32%) received probation only. In all 94 federal districts, 73% were sent to prison. Restitution was ordered for 362 people (85%).

Updated November 4, 2026 · Sources: U.S. Sentencing Commission and Federal Judicial Center, fiscal years 2016–2025

This post uses the U.S. Sentencing Commission's records of 428 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.

Prison Was Less Common Than Nationally

The Commission's "Fraud/Theft/Embezzlement" offense type had 428 people in the Northern District of Indiana. They were 14% of the 3,085 people sentenced in the district.

A total of 249 (58%) were sentenced to prison, and 139 (32%) received probation only, with no prison or other confinement. Nationally, 73% of people in this category were sent to prison, so the district's share was lower.

Among those sent to prison, the median prison term was 24 months. A quarter received 41 months or more, and a quarter received 10 months or less. The median for all 94 districts was 20 months. For all offenses in the district, the median was 51 months.

Restitution and Other Orders

Restitution was ordered for 362 people (85%), which is the most common financial order in this group. A fine was ordered for 26 people (6%).

Supervised release followed prison for 236 people (55%), with a median term of 24 months.

Criminal History

Most people in this group had little prior record under the Commission's scoring. In criminal history, 74% were in the lowest category, category I, and 3% were in the highest, category VI.

Court-martial records have no criminal history field, so this measure applies only to federal data.

Pleas and Trials

A total of 401 people (94%) pleaded guilty, and 27 were convicted after a trial. Nationally, 96% pleaded guilty. Among the guilty pleas, 95% had a written plea agreement and 5% were straight pleas with no agreement.

The median prison term was 21 months after a guilty plea and 36 months after a trial. The trial figure is based on 26 people sent to prison. The records do not show whether the cases differed in size or facts.

Guidelines and the Guideline Range

The most common primary guideline was §2B1.1 (Larceny, Embezzlement, and Other Forms of Theft), with 397 people. Smaller groups were sentenced under §2B1.4 (Insider Trading), with 3 people, §2B6.1 (Altering or Removing Motor Vehicle Identification Numbers, or Trafficking in Motor Vehicles or Parts with Altered or Obliterated Identification Numbers), with 2 people, and §2X3.1 (Accessory After the Fact), with 1 person.

Of the 425 people with guideline information, 51% (215) were sentenced within the range. Another 16% (69) were below it at the government's request, 32% (136) were below it without a request, and 1% (5) were above it. For all 94 districts, 45% were within the range, and for all offenses in the district the figure was 47%.

A mandatory minimum prison term applied to 38 of the 427 people with that information (9%).

Fewer People Sentenced in Later Years

Fiscal years 2016 to 2019 had 241 people, and fiscal years 2020 to 2025 had 187 people. In the yearly table, counts fall from 69 people in fiscal year 2016 to 25 in fiscal year 2023, then 39 in fiscal year 2025.

Yearly medians range from 12 months in fiscal year 2024 to 32 months in fiscal year 2018. The records cannot show what drove these changes.

The data covers only people who were convicted and sentenced, so acquittals and dismissals are not counted.

Fiscal yearPeople sentencedMedian prisonPleaded guilty
20166924 months91%
20174922 months96%
20185132 months90%
20197215 months94%
20203127 months94%
20213324 months100%
20222927 months97%
20232524 months96%
20243012 months83%
20253921.9 months97%

How We Counted

Everyone sentenced in federal court in the Northern District of Indiana (U.S. Sentencing Commission district label "Indiana North") in fiscal years 2016 to 2025 whose offense type was "Fraud/Theft/Embezzlement" (428). 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.

Mandatory minimum sentences. Many federal statutes on drugs, images of child exploitation, child sex abuse, and firearms carry mandatory minimum prison terms. The UCMJ has mandatory minimums only for a few offenses (a dishonorable discharge or dismissal for rape and sexual assault, and life for premeditated murder). Federal sentences for these offenses are partly set by Congress, not by the judge.

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.

↑ Top