How to Get a Judge to Reduce Your Client’s White-Collar Sentence

I worked on a federal criminal case this year where the sentencing guideline for the crime was 14 years. The client was sentenced to a year and a day, a 93% reduction. When defense attorneys hear this, they ask: “What was the legal argument that moved the judge?”

That’s the wrong question. After consulting on more than 400 cases in district court, I’ve learned that what moves judges has less to do with legal arguments and more to do with strategic mitigation.

Federal judges know the law. What they’re evaluating is whether this defendant is genuinely capable of transformation and whether they can justify substantial leniency in writing.

One Bite Only

The pre-sentence interview, or PSR, is the most critical part of sentencing. It’s where a probation officer creates a pre-sentence report that the judge will rely on heavily. In the report, the defendant is indirectly speaking to the judge, and everything said becomes part of the permanent record.

He has one bite at the apple.

Victims always come first. The defendant must address the victims, then demonstrate genuine remorse, humility, and shame; then the lessons learned; then the plan for the future and why they’ll never be in another courtroom again.

A probation officer who believes the defendant “gets it” will write a narrative that supports leniency. One who senses performance will write a prosecution-friendly report.

In the 14-year case, we spent six weeks preparing the defendant for this interview, not rehearsing answers, but helping him genuinely process what he’d done. The judge later noted it was “the best PSR I’ve ever seen.”

Engineering PSR Narratives

If done correctly, the personal narrative submitted to the probation officer gets fully attached to the pre-sentence report. Most defendants submit brief letters that get summarized in a paragraph. The narratives that get attached in full are typically 3,000 to 4,000 words and written in the defendant’s own voice.

This matters because the PSR isn’t just read by the judge; it’s the foundational document that follows the defendant through the entire system. The case manager in prison reads it. The unit manager reads it. The halfway house staff reads it. The probation officer supervising release reads it.

A fully attached personal narrative gives the defendant a voice in every one of those decisions—early release consideration, halfway house placement, supervised release conditions.

In the Mathew Bowyer case, the sports betting case connected to Shohei Ohtani’s interpreter, we submitted a 3,500-word personal narrative that the probation officer attached in full. The judge specifically cited our “significant mitigation” at sentencing.

Compliance Rebuild

White collar defendants can demonstrate they’ve rebuilt the very compliance systems they violated. This is extraordinarily powerful with judges because it shows transformation through structure, not just sentiment.

The Department of Justice evaluates corporate compliance programs using seven pillars: written policies, ethical leadership, training and communication, monitoring and auditing, internal reporting systems, enforcement and discipline, and continuous improvement. White collar defendants can apply this framework to their personal rehabilitation.

In a securities fraud case, the defendant, a former compliance officer, created an ethics rebuild memo documenting how he’d failed his fiduciary duties. We mapped each of the Justice Department’s seven pillars to his rehabilitation plan. He completed the University of Pennsylvania’s Regulatory Compliance course and created new written policies.”

His allocution: “Your Honor, I failed in my duty of care, loyalty, and oversight. I should have implemented stronger compliance systems. Since then, I’ve rebuilt the ethics framework I should have had then.”

The judge reduced his guideline range substantially, noting the defendant had “turned his compliance failure into documented expertise.”

Credible Versus Performative

Federal judges have seen every version of last-minute rehabilitation theater—online courses enrolled the week before sentencing, generic letters, charity work that began after indictment.

Credible rehabilitation predates sentencing and shows sustained effort. It includes documentation from therapists who’ve seen the defendant weekly for 18 months and educational institutions that verify degree completion begun during investigation.

In the 14-year case, the defendant had been in weekly therapy for 14 months before sentencing. His therapist submitted a clinical assessment of genuine transformation, not a character reference. The defendant also completed 24 college credits toward a degree he’d abandoned 20 years earlier. This was evidence of someone rebuilding their life because they recognized they’d broken it.

Restitution Reality

In white collar cases, judges need to see realistic restitution plans. In the 14-year case, the defendant voluntarily paid $47,000 in restitution eight months before sentencing not because his attorney suggested it, but because he’d liquidated a retirement account. The judge cited this as evidence of genuine remorse versus courtroom theater.

Effective restitution mitigation includes forensic financial analysis showing actual ability to pay, structured payment schedules, and evidence of asset liquidation. Vague promises don’t move judges. Documented payments already made do.

Federal judges want to grant variances when they can justify them. The job is to provide documented evidence they need to defend leniency in written opinions.

In white-collar cases, that means authentic accountability through actions, credible rehabilitation documented over months, compliance rebuild showing mastery of failure, realistic restitution, personal narratives influencing every stakeholder, and strategic timing building judicial confidence.

That’s what actually moves federal judges beyond the guidelines.

This article does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg Industry Group, Inc., the publisher of Bloomberg Law, Bloomberg Tax, and Bloomberg Government, or its owners.

Author Information

Joseph De Gregorio is the founder of JN Advisor, a federal sentencing mitigation consultancy.

Write for Us: Author Guidelines