Chapter Summary – How Early Mitigation Shows Accountability and Progress
In this chapter, I discuss how a sentence-mitigation plan helps judges see the person behind the Department of Justice press release or indictment. Effective mitigation includes a personal narrative, release plan, character letters, and documented community work. Whether someone pleads guilty or is convicted at trial, starting early—before the Presentence Investigation Report—gives the defendant time to build a record that can be defended in front of really cynical stakeholders, like a probation officer and a Judge.
When Defendants Should Start a Sentence-Mitigation Plan
When is the right time to think about a Sentence-Mitigation Plan? The question reminds me of an old line about planting a peach tree. A speaker once asked his audience when the best time would be to plant one. People offered guesses: morning, winter, summer. No one was correct.
He paused, then explained that the best time was 20 years ago — and the second-best time was today.
A Sentence-Mitigation Plan works the same way. Many defendants delay preparing for sentencing, often because they cannot see themselves as “criminal defendants.” They may believe they’re different from others who enter the justice system, or they assume the system will recognize their intentions or background.
In my book Lessons From Prison, I describe thinking the same way. As a stockbroker, I pictured myself as a financial professional, a college graduate, a taxpayer, and a good son — not someone who would face charges. When I learned securities-law violations were coming, I believed I could maneuver out of it. Federal authorities saw me differently. Once I became a target, conviction rates of more than 85% made the next steps became obvious. With odds like that, it makes sense to begin developing a mitigation strategy as early as possible.
Understanding what your defense attorney will do is part of that preparation. Attorneys work with the evidence, the procedural rules, the laws Congress has passed, relevant case law, and the government’s capacity to prove its case. Good attorneys think strategically, pushing for the best outcome. Prosecutors pursue convictions; defense attorneys counter their efforts. But attorneys may not always have the time to fully understand the defendant’s background.
That responsibility belongs to the defendant. A thorough life story can make a real difference at sentencing.
Our team has interviewed federal judges who say they want to hear directly from defendants at sentencing. Anyone can watch similar perspectives from Judge Mark Bennett (Northern District of Iowa) or Judge Stephen Bough (Western District of Missouri). Judges recognize the value attorneys bring, but they also recognize the gaps. Many defense attorneys hesitate to let their clients say anything, especially early, because they worry prosecutors may twist a statement. This caution is understandable, particularly when defendants begin their case in denial.
Based on our work with more than 1,000 people, we’ve seen how much a well-constructed mitigation strategy can help. An effective Sentence-Mitigation Plan supports the attorney and gives the judge information only the defendant can provide.
A strong mitigation strategy aims to:
- Help the judge see the defendant as an individual.
- Provide context about influences and life circumstances.
- Show aspects of the person that legal arguments cannot convey.
- Present the defendant in familiar surroundings.
- Offer perspectives from people in the community.
A mitigation strategy never excuses misconduct. It does the opposite. It shows why a defendant is worthy of consideration. If the conduct is addressed, the focus should be on:
- Understanding the harm or loss to victims.
- Influences or decisions that led to the offense.
- Lessons learned.
- Steps taken to make things right.
- A plan that demonstrates the defendant will not reoffend.
Sentence-Mitigation Plan Considerations for Trial
Most people charged with a crime begin with a not-guilty plea. Their attorneys evaluate the risks of trial and negotiate plea agreements. A small percentage go to trial and maintain their innocence.
If a defendant is convicted and intends to appeal, the mitigation plan should not address the offense or the evidence. Instead, it should focus strictly on the defendant’s life, values, and conduct outside of the legal issues.
Regardless of the stage, a mitigation plan is similar to preparing a professional presentation. The audience is one person: the judge.
A defendant should ask:
- How can I differentiate myself from others who stand before this judge?
First-Person Storytelling in a Sentence-Mitigation Plan
Let the lawyer argue the law. When it comes to telling your life story, use your own words.
Judges know defense attorneys will argue for leniency. They have read the case law, reviewed memoranda, and studied the guidelines. What they often lack is meaningful insight into the person they must sentence.
A first-person narrative gives them that insight.
Sentencing is often the only chance a defendant has to influence the judge’s perception. Preparation matters. The question is how much effort the defendant is willing to invest to build a persuasive presentation.
Three Components of an Effective Sentence-Mitigation Plan
We encourage defendants to begin early. No one can change the past, but anyone can begin documenting who they are and how they are working to change. A three-part framework includes:
- A personal sentencing narrative
- A coordinated character-reference letter campaign
- A community-service project
Sentencing Narratives
Judges consistently tell us that first-person narratives help them understand the defendant. For people who plead guilty, the narrative should cover the five key areas listed earlier:
- Victim understanding.
- Influences leading to the offense.
- Lessons learned.
- Efforts to make things right.
- A plan to live responsibly going forward.
For people convicted at trial, the narrative should respect the appellate strategy while still helping the judge understand the person’s background.
There is no guaranteed outcome. But based on extensive experience, people who invest the time to construct a thoughtful narrative consistently put themselves in a stronger position.
Judges receive heavy caseloads and extensive paperwork. A 1,500–3,000-word narrative is usually long enough to be thorough without losing clarity. Editing, revising, and asking trusted readers for feedback can strengthen the final version. When the defendant is satisfied, it should be reviewed with the defense attorney.
Character-Reference Letters
Judges tell us they prefer letters from people who know the defendant well, not letters from influential professionals who barely know them. The strongest letters describe specific interactions, such as:
- Coaching youth sports.
- Volunteering in community programs.
- Helping a sick neighbor with routine tasks.
These letters help judges see the defendant as a multidimensional person.
Writers should know the defendant has been honest about the conviction. If they have seen remorse, they should describe it. A few well-written letters are better than a large stack that repeats the same message. Judges generally do not want more than a dozen.
Writers should avoid:
- Excuses
- Claims that the jury or government was wrong
- Arguments that the defendant should not be punished
- Templates used by multiple people
The goal is clarity and honesty.
Sentencing Mitigation Videos
A video can give the court a fuller picture of a defendant’s life. It can show environments, relationships, and community involvement that written documents may miss. Production can be expensive — $5,000 to $25,000 depending on travel and equipment. But a skilled person with a smartphone and editing software can still create a meaningful video at no cost.
A 15-minute maximum is ideal. Every second should matter. Effective videos use b-roll footage, interviews, and real-life scenes. One memorable project included more than 30 people and multiple locations, giving the judge a clear and balanced view of the individual’s life.
Conclusion on Building a Sentence-Mitigation Plan
A well-designed mitigation strategy takes time, effort, and consistency. When defendants invest in these three components — narrative, character letters, and community service — they strengthen their prospects at sentencing. Ideally, the plan should be built before the Presentence Investigation Report (PSR) takes place.
To learn more about PSRs, the DOJ’s Justice Manual and the U.S. Courts PSR overview provide useful context.
For more on investigative stages, the FBI White Collar Crime page offers definitions and examples.
If you want to talk through your own mitigation strategy or ask questions about sentencing preparation, you’re welcome to join our weekly webinar or schedule a short call to discuss next steps.
Thank You,
Justin Paperny, Author of Lessons From Prison and Ethics in Motion.
FAQ
When should a defendant start a Sentence-Mitigation Plan?
As early as possible. Starting before an indictment or the Presentence Investigation Report provides more time to build an authentic record.
Does a mitigation plan replace the work of a defense attorney?
No. It complements the attorney’s work by providing the judge with personal details only a defendant can express.
Should a mitigation plan address the offense directly?
If the defendant pleaded guilty, yes—briefly, with focus on victims, lessons learned, and plans moving forward. Excuses or rationalizations will backfire, leading to a longer prison sentence.
How long should a sentencing narrative be?
Typically 1,500–5,000 words. Long enough to be thorough but short enough for a judge to review efficiently.
Who should write character-reference letters?
People who know the defendant well and can describe specific experiences that reflect character—coaches, colleagues, community members, or longtime friends.
Should character letters discuss fairness of the conviction or sentence?
No. Judges consistently advise against this. Letters should focus solely on the person’s character; letters that tell a Judge what to do always backfire.
Are sentencing videos necessary?
Not required, but potentially valuable. They can show the judge aspects of the defendant’s life that written documents cannot fully convey.
Can a defendant convicted at trial still create a mitigation plan?
Yes. Review our work with Jerry Lundergan or Scott Tucker. The narrative should focus on the defendant’s background and their plans moving forward.
What is the main purpose of a mitigation strategy?
To help the judge take the totality of the person’s life into perspective.
How many character-reference letters should be submitted?
Judges generally prefer fewer than a dozen, with each letter offering unique, specific insights into the person’s character.
Why does first-person writing matter at sentencing?
Judges want to hear directly from the defendant. Your voice carries a different weight than an attorney’s argument.
Does a mitigation plan guarantee a lower sentence?
No. But it consistently puts defendants in a stronger position than those who rely on hope.
