§2E1.1 Unlawful Conduct Relating to Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations: Federal Sentences, Fiscal Year 2016
In fiscal year 2016, 56 people were sentenced in federal court under §2E1.1, "Unlawful Conduct Relating to Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations." All 56 (100%) pleaded guilty. A prison term went to 42 (75%), and the median prison term was 24 months (2 years).
· Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 6 min read
Trends › Federal Prosecution Analysis › §2E1.1 Unlawful Conduct Relating to Racketeer Influenced and › §2E1.1: FY2016
In brief: In fiscal year 2016, 56 people were sentenced in federal court under §2E1.1, "Unlawful Conduct Relating to Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations." All 56 (100%) pleaded guilty. A prison term went to 42 (75%), and the median prison term was 24 months (2 years).
This post uses the U.S. Sentencing Commission's records of 56 people sentenced in federal court in fiscal year 2016. 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.
Every Person Sentenced Had Pleaded Guilty
All 56 people sentenced in fiscal year 2016 (100%) pleaded guilty, and 0 were convicted after a trial. For all fiscal years 2016 to 2025 under this guideline, 95% pleaded guilty, so the 2016 share was higher.
Every guilty plea (100%) had a written plea agreement. Because no one was convicted at trial, the data has no trial sentences to compare with plea sentences.
Prison Terms and Probation
A prison term was imposed on 42 of the 56 people (75%). Another 9 (16%) received probation only, with no prison or other confinement.
The median prison term among those sent to prison was 24 months. A quarter received 32.2 months or more, and a quarter received 18.5 months or less. Across all years, 90% went to prison and the median was 27 months, so both the share and the median were lower in fiscal year 2016.
Sentences and the Guideline Range
The guideline range is the range the Guidelines Manual calculates for a case. In fiscal year 2016, 38% of sentences (21 people) were within it. That is close to the 39% for all years under this guideline, and lower than the 49% for all federal cases that year.
Below the range at the government's request were 34% (19), and below it without a government request were 27% (15). One person (2%) was above the range.
Mandatory Minimums, Supervised Release, and Payments
A mandatory minimum prison term applied to 2 of the 56 people with that information recorded (4%).
Supervised release after prison was ordered for 42 people (75%), with a median term of 36 months. A fine was ordered for 6 people (11%), and restitution for 1 (2%).
Other Years and the Whole Federal System
In the next fiscal year, 2017, 68 people were sentenced under §2E1.1, with a median prison term of 24 months and 29% of sentences within the range. Across fiscal years 2016 to 2025, 511 people were sentenced under this guideline.
For everyone sentenced in federal court in fiscal year 2016, there were 67,742 people. Their median prison term was 24 months, which is the same as under §2E1.1 in this year. Of those, 97% pleaded guilty. The table lists each year.
| Fiscal year | People sentenced | Median prison | Pleaded guilty |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | 56 | 24 months | 100% |
| 2017 | 68 | 24 months | 90% |
| 2018 | 142 | 28 months | 97% |
| 2019 | 62 | 33 months | 97% |
| 2020 | 25 | 30 months | 84% |
| 2021 | 31 | 24 months | 100% |
| 2022 | 48 | 24 months | 100% |
| 2023 | 47 | 24 months | 89% |
| 2024 | 22 | 24 months | 95% |
| 2025 | 10 | 25.5 months | 90% |
What the Records Do Not Cover
The Sentencing Commission counts only people who were convicted and sentenced. Acquittals and dismissals are not in the data. The fiscal year ran from October 1, 2015 to September 30, 2016.
In this year, 52% of these people were in criminal history category I, and 5% were in category VI. The approved crosswalk has no close court-martial counterpart for this guideline, so the numbers are reported as federal data only.
How We Counted
Everyone sentenced in federal court in fiscal year 2016 whose primary sentencing guideline was §2E1.1 (56), U.S. Sentencing Commission individual data files. The primary guideline is the one that set the offense level for the most serious count.
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.
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)
- §2E1.1 Unlawful Conduct Relating to Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations: Federal Sentences, FY2016–2025 (overview)
- §2E1.1 Unlawful Conduct Relating to Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations: Federal Sentences, Fiscal Year 2017 (previous or next fiscal year)
- How Often Federal Judges Sentence Outside the Guideline Range
- Mandatory Minimums: How Many Federal Sentences Are Set by Congress
- 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.