Table of Contents
“I took early responsibility and built a mitigation narrative. The judge recognized my military service and granted probation.”
Charge: Federal fraud involving a government purchase card, at a VA clinic. Guilty plea.
Service: Personal narrative to the judge, character reference letter guidance, prison designation recommendation.
Outcome: He arrived expecting 46 to 57 months. The judge imposed 27, and singled out the character reference letters as remarkable.
At sentencing, the judge stopped to say something he does not often say. "Very rarely have I seen the quality of letters I received on your behalf. They were remarkable." Then he imposed a sentence about half of what the defendant had walked in expecting. That is what federal sentencing mitigation, done well, can do.
From the Air Force to the VA
Kevin Rumph Jr. is the son of an Army veteran. He joined the United States Air Force at eighteen. He began at Alaska's Eielson Air Force Base, then transferred to Langley in Virginia. In 2003 he arrived at Tallil Airbase in Iraq, where he survived mortar attacks, locusts, floods, and a dust storm. He left the Air Force in 2006 with the rank of Staff Sergeant. He joined the Solid Rock Pentecostal Church and married another Air Force veteran.
In 2012 the Department of Veterans Affairs hired him as a purchasing agent in the prosthetic department at its community-based outpatient clinic at Fort McPherson, Georgia. Around the same time, doctors diagnosed him with PTSD related to his service in Iraq. He later used his government credit card to buy medical equipment that he resold for personal gain. In August 2021 he accepted responsibility and pleaded guilty in federal court.
The Day the Draft PSR Arrived
Early in his case, he found Michael Santos's Prison Professors videos on YouTube. He valued the practical, informed advice about how to navigate the system as a defendant.
"Michael gave me a strong sense of direction. He taught me that preparation is paramount, and that not every attorney is a sentencing mitigation expert."
He contacted White Collar Advice the day he received his draft Pre-Sentence Report and spoke with Sam Mangel about the next steps.
"From the first consultation, Sam was extremely helpful and understanding. Anytime I reach out to him, Sam answers or calls back soon. Sam's been wonderful."
He worked with Lawrence Hartman to prepare a personal narrative.
"Larry was great and very responsive. The process was straightforward and the letter was on point."
Sam sent Denise Nunley to help the family draft character reference letters.
"Denise took the stress away when she spoke to my mother and in-laws. Her work was a real blessing. Everyone in my family had good things to say about Denise."
46 to 57 Expected, 27 Imposed
He arrived at sentencing ready to receive 46 to 57 months. The judge spoke positively about the mitigation work.
"The judge was particularly happy with the character reference letters. I remember exactly what he said: 'Very rarely have I seen the quality of letters I received on your behalf. They were remarkable.'"
The judge also praised the personal narrative for giving him a better understanding of the story. He imposed a sentence of 27 months, about half of what the defendant had expected.
"Sam also gave me a recommendation for my prison designation before sentencing. Now I'm learning about the CARES Act and other ways to help myself moving forward."
Getting Ready, and What Comes After
He reached out for help from a lawyer, a trauma specialist, and his pastor. He took responsibility for breaking the law and for the pain he caused his family. Looking ahead, he plans to return to real estate and build a business the right way.
"Sam gave me comprehensive help and lots of good information. I went from fear and uncertainty to being informed and prepared. Now I have a clear plan for when I get to prison and for when I get out."
Asked whether he would recommend the team to another defendant, he did not hedge: "A million percent! Yes I would recommend it!"
The Outcome
Measure | Result |
|---|---|
Charge | Federal fraud involving a government purchase card (VA clinic) |
Expected sentence | 46 to 57 months |
Sentence imposed | 27 months |
Judge's comment | Called the character reference letters remarkable; praised the personal narrative |
Assets built | Personal narrative, character reference letters, prison designation recommendation |
Status | Preparing to surrender |
Frequently Asked Questions
What is federal sentencing mitigation and how does it affect a sentence?
Federal sentencing mitigation is the documented case for who the defendant is beyond the offense: a personal narrative in the defendant's own voice, character reference letters grounded in specific moments, PSR interview preparation, and a prison designation strategy. It does not change the charge or the guideline math. It gives the judge a fuller picture to weigh under the 3553(a) factors. In this case the mitigation record helped move a sentence from an expected 46 to 57 months down to 27.
Do character reference letters actually influence a federal judge?
They can, when they describe specific moments rather than general praise. Judges read many letters and can tell the difference between a template and a real account of what a person did and when. In this case the judge said from the bench that he had very rarely seen letters of that quality and called them remarkable, then referenced them before announcing the sentence. Letters that show a real person in real moments are the ones that register.
Can military service and PTSD be part of sentencing mitigation?
Yes. Military service and a documented condition such as PTSD are part of the history and characteristics a judge weighs under 18 U.S.C. 3553(a). They do not excuse the offense, and presenting them well means documenting them honestly, not using them as a shield. In this case the defendant is an Air Force veteran who served in Iraq and was later diagnosed with service-related PTSD, and that history was part of the documented record the judge considered.
How much can sentencing mitigation reduce a sentence?
There is no guaranteed number. Mitigation gives the judge a factual basis to consider a lower sentence; the judge decides. In this case the defendant expected 46 to 57 months and received 27, about half of what he anticipated. Other cases move less. The reduction depends on the offense, the guideline range, the judge, and how complete and honest the documented record is.
What is the difference between a defense attorney and a sentencing mitigation expert?
A defense attorney handles the law: negotiations, motions, sentencing memoranda, courtroom advocacy. A sentencing mitigation expert builds the documented record of who the defendant is: the personal narrative, character reference letter strategy, PSR preparation, and designation planning. As the defendant put it, not every attorney is a mitigation expert. The two roles run in parallel, and neither replaces the other.
What can a defendant do to prepare before surrendering to prison?
Build the record before sentencing, then plan for the sentence itself: understand the prison designation process and ask the judge for a recommendation, identify the programs to pursue inside, and learn which post-sentencing mechanisms apply to the case. In this case the team provided a prison designation recommendation before sentencing, and the defendant left with a plan for his time inside and for coming home.
Written by
Justin Paperny
Founder White Collar Advice