§2Q2.1 Offenses Involving Fish, Wildlife, and Plants: Federal Sentences, Fiscal Year 2017
All 63 people sentenced in federal court in fiscal year 2017 under §2Q2.1, "Offenses Involving Fish, Wildlife, and Plants," pleaded guilty, and none was convicted after a trial. Prison was imposed on 12 (19%), with a median prison term of 5.9 months. Probation only was the result for 41 (65%).
· Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 6 min read
Trends › Federal Prosecution Analysis › §2Q2.1 Offenses Involving Fish, Wildlife, and Plants › §2Q2.1: FY2017
In brief: All 63 people sentenced in federal court in fiscal year 2017 under §2Q2.1, "Offenses Involving Fish, Wildlife, and Plants," pleaded guilty, and none was convicted after a trial. Prison was imposed on 12 (19%), with a median prison term of 5.9 months. Probation only was the result for 41 (65%).
This post uses the U.S. Sentencing Commission's records of 63 people sentenced in federal court in fiscal year 2017. 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 Sentenced Person Pleaded Guilty
The U.S. Sentencing Commission recorded 63 people whose primary guideline was §2Q2.1 in fiscal year 2017. A total of 63 of 63 (100%) pleaded guilty, and 0 were convicted after a trial. For all guidelines that year, guilty pleas were 97%.
Among those who pleaded guilty, 97% had a written plea agreement, and 3% were straight pleas with no agreement. Because no one in this group went to trial, there is no trial prison term to report.
The Commission's data counts only people who were convicted and sentenced. It does not show how many people were charged and then acquitted or had charges dismissed.
Prison and Probation Results
Probation only, with no prison or other confinement, went to 41 of the 63 (65%). A prison term went to 12 (19%).
The median prison term among the 12 was 5.9 months. A quarter received 10.5 months or more, and a quarter received 3 months or less. The median for all guidelines in 2017 was 24 months.
After prison, 12 (19%) were ordered to serve supervised release, with a median term of 24 months. A mandatory minimum prison term applied to 0 of the 63 people.
Fines and Restitution
A fine was ordered for 26 people (41%), and restitution was ordered for 26 (41%). Those are separate orders, and the Commission's counts do not say how many people received both.
Criminal history was in the lowest category, category I, for 83% of the group. In the highest category, category VI, it was 2%. Court-martial records have no criminal history field.
Where Sentences Fell Against the Guideline Range
Within the advisory range: 38% (24). Below the range at the government's request: 38% (24). Below the range without a government request: 24% (15). Above the range: 0% (0).
Sentences within the range were less common than the 49% for all federal cases in fiscal year 2017. The share within the range for this guideline was 49% in 2016 and 47% in 2018, so 2017 was lower than both neighboring years.
How 2017 Compares With the Years Around It
The previous year, 2016, had 84 people and a median prison term of 10 months. The next year, 2018, had 121 people and a median of 6 months. The median in 2017 was lower than in 2016 and about the same as in 2018.
Across fiscal years 2016 to 2025, the Commission counted 798 people under this guideline. Of those, 32% went to prison, the median prison term was 6 months, and 98% pleaded guilty. The table shows each year.
With 12 prison terms, a median can change a good deal from year to year. The records cannot show why any year differed.
| Fiscal year | People sentenced | Median prison | Pleaded guilty |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | 84 | 10 months | 93% |
| 2017 | 63 | 5.9 months | 100% |
| 2018 | 121 | 6 months | more than 99% |
| 2019 | 82 | 5.5 months | 100% |
| 2020 | 80 | 6 months | 99% |
| 2021 | 73 | 6 months | 100% |
| 2022 | 69 | 7.7 months | 100% |
| 2023 | 79 | 10 months | 97% |
| 2024 | 57 | 6 months | 98% |
| 2025 | 90 | 4.4 months | 99% |
Scope of the Group
The Commission lists the offense type for all 63 cases as Environmental. Fiscal year 2017 ran from October 1, 2016 to September 30, 2017. Prison terms are the terms imposed, not time served.
The approved crosswalk has no close court-martial counterpart for this guideline, so the post reports the federal numbers on their own.
How We Counted
Everyone sentenced in federal court in fiscal year 2017 whose primary sentencing guideline was §2Q2.1 (63), 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.
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)
- §2Q2.1 Offenses Involving Fish, Wildlife, and Plants: Federal Sentences, FY2016–2025 (overview)
- §2Q2.1 Offenses Involving Fish, Wildlife, and Plants: Federal Sentences, Fiscal Year 2016 (previous or next fiscal year)
- §2Q2.1 Offenses Involving Fish, Wildlife, and Plants: Federal Sentences, Fiscal Year 2018 (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.